GTY · Read the filing

Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations

The following discussion and analysis should be read in conjunction with the “Cautionary Note Regarding Forward-Looking Statements”; the sections in Part I entitled “Item 1A. Risk Factors”; and the consolidated financial statements and related notes in “Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data”.

This section of this Form 10-K generally discusses 2020 and 2019 items and year-to-year comparisons between 2020 and 2019. Discussions of 2018 items and year-to-year comparisons between 2019 and 2018 that are not included in this Form 10-K can be found in "Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations" in Part II, Item 7 of the Company's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2019.

General

Real Estate Investment Trust

We are a REIT specializing in the acquisition, ownership, leasing, financing and redevelopment of convenience stores, gasoline stations and other automotive-related and retail real estate, including express car washes, instant oil change centers, automotive service centers, automotive parts retailers and select other properties. As of December 31, 2020, we owned 901 properties and leased 58 properties from third-party landlords. As a REIT, we are not subject to federal corporate income tax on the taxable income we distribute to our stockholders. In order to continue to qualify for taxation as a REIT, we are required, among other things, to distribute at least 90% of our ordinary taxable income to our stockholders each year.

COVID-19

In March 2020, the World Health Organization declared the outbreak of COVID-19 as a pandemic. The impact from the rapidly changing market and economic conditions due to the COVID-19 pandemic remains uncertain. While we have not incurred significant disruptions to our financial results thus far from the COVID-19 pandemic, we are unable to accurately predict the impact that COVID-19 will have on our business, operations and financial result due to numerous evolving factors, including the severity of the disease, the duration of the pandemic, actions that may be taken by governmental authorities, the impact to our tenants, including the ability of our tenants to make their rental payments and any closures of tenants’ facilities. Additionally, while we expect to continue our overall growth strategy during the 2021 and to fund our business operations from cash flows from our properties and our Revolving Facility, the rapid developments and fluidity of COVID-19 may cause us to re-evaluate, if not suspend, our growth strategy and/or to rely more heavily on borrowings under our Revolving Facility, proceeds from the sale of shares of our common stock under our ATM Program, or other sources of liquidity. See “Part I. Item. 1A. Risk Factors” in this Annual Report on Form 10-K for additional information.

Our Triple-Net Leases

Substantially all of our properties are leased on a triple-net basis to convenience store operators, petroleum distributors and other automotive-related and retail tenants. Our tenants either operate their business at our properties directly or sublet our properties and supply fuel to third parties that operate the convenience store and gasoline station businesses. Our triple-net lease tenants are responsible for the payment of all taxes, maintenance, repairs, insurance and other operating expenses relating to our properties, and are also responsible for environmental contamination occurring during the terms of their leases and in certain cases also for environmental contamination that existed before their leases commenced.

Substantially all of our tenants’ financial results depend on convenience store sales, the sale of refined petroleum products or rental income from their subtenants. As a result, our tenants’ financial results are highly dependent on the performance of the petroleum marketing industry, which is highly competitive and subject to volatility. (For additional information regarding risks related to our tenants’ dependence on the performance of the petroleum industry, see “Item 1A. Risk Factors – Substantially all of our tenants depend on the same industry for their revenues” in this Form 10-K.) During the terms of our leases, we monitor the credit quality of our triple-net lease tenants by reviewing their published credit rating, if available, reviewing publicly available financial statements, or reviewing financial or other operating statements which are delivered to us pursuant to applicable lease agreements, monitoring news reports regarding our tenants and their respective businesses, and monitoring the timeliness of lease payments and the performance of other financial covenants under their leases. For additional information regarding our real estate business, our properties and environmental matters, see “Item 1. Business – Company Operations”, “Item 2. Properties” and “Environmental Matters” below.

Our Properties

Net Lease. As of December 31, 2020, we leased 946 of our properties to tenants under triple-net leases.

Our net lease properties include 829 properties leased under 31 separate unitary or master triple-net leases and 117 properties leased under single unit triple-net leases. These leases generally provide for an initial term of 15 or 20 years with options for successive renewal terms of up to 20 years and periodic rent escalations. Several of our leases provide for additional rent based on the aggregate volume of fuel sold. In addition, certain of our leases require the tenants to invest capital in our properties, substantially all of which is related to the replacement of USTs that are owned by our tenants.

Redevelopment. As of December 31,2020, we were actively redeveloping six of our properties either as a new convenience and gasoline use or for alternative single-tenant net lease retail uses.

Vacancies. As of December 31, 2020, seven of our properties were vacant. We expect that we will either sell or enter into new leases on these properties over time.

Investment Strategy and Activity

As part of our overall growth strategy, we regularly review acquisition and financing opportunities to invest in additional convenience stores, gasoline stations and other automotive-related and retail real estate. We primarily pursue sale-leaseback transactions and other real estate acquisitions that result in us owning fee simple interests in our properties. Our investment strategy seeks to generate current income and benefit from long-term appreciation in the underlying value of our real estate. To achieve that goal, we seek to invest in high quality individual properties and real estate portfolios that are in strong primary markets that serve high density population centers. A key element of our investment strategy is to invest in properties that will enhance our geographic and tenant diversification.

During the year ended December 31, 2020, we acquired fee simple interests in 34 properties for an aggregate purchase price of $150.0 million. In February 2020, we acquired fee simple interests in ten car wash properties located in the Kansas City Metropolitan Statistical Area (“MSA”) for an aggregate purchase price of $50.3 million and entered into a unitary lease at the closing of the transactions. In August 2020, we acquired fee simple interests in seven car wash properties located in the San Antonio MSA for an aggregate purchase price of $28.3 million and entered into a unitary lease at the closing of the transaction. In October 2020, we acquired fee simple interests in six convenience store and gasoline station properties located throughout the state of Texas for an aggregate purchase price of $28.7 million and entered into a unitary lease at the closing of the transaction. In addition, during the year ended December 31, 2020, we acquired fee simple interests in 11 convenience store and other automotive-related properties in various transactions for an aggregate purchase price of $42.7 million.

During the year ended December 31, 2019, we acquired fee simple interests in 27 properties for an aggregate purchase price of $87.2 million. In June 2019, we acquired fee simple interests in six convenience store and gasoline station properties located in the Los Angeles MSA for $24.7 million and entered into a unitary lease at the closing of the transaction. In November 2019, we acquired fee simple interests in four car wash properties located in the Las Vegas MSA for $14.1 million and entered into a unitary lease at the closing of the transaction. In addition, during the year ended December 31, 2019, we acquired fee simple interests in 17 convenience store and other automotive-related properties in various transactions for an aggregate purchase price of $48.3 million.

Redevelopment Strategy and Activity

We believe that certain of our properties are well-suited for either new convenience store use or for alternative single-tenant net lease retail uses, such as automotive parts and service, quick service restaurants, specialty retail and bank branches. We believe that the redeveloped properties can be leased or sold at higher values than their current use.

For the year ended December 31, 2020 and 2019, rent commenced on six and four completed redevelopment projects, respectively, that were placed back into service in our net lease portfolio. Since the inception of our redevelopment program in 2015, we have completed 19 redevelopment projects.

For the year ended December 31, 2020, we spent $0.3 million (net of write-offs) of construction-in-progress costs related to our redevelopment activities and transferred $1.6 million of construction-in-progress to buildings and improvements on our consolidated balance sheet. For the year ended December 31, 2019, we spent $0.4 million (net of write-offs) of construction-in-progress costs related to our redevelopment activities and transferred $0.5 million of construction-in-progress to buildings and improvements on our consolidated balance sheet.

As of December 31, 2020, we had six properties under active redevelopment and others in various stages of feasibility planning for potential recapture from our net lease portfolio, including four properties for which we have signed new leases and which will be transferred to redevelopment when the appropriate entitlements, permits and approvals have been secured.

Asset Impairment

We perform an impairment analysis for the carrying amounts of our properties in accordance with GAAP when indicators of impairment exist. We reduced the carrying amounts to fair value, and recorded impairment charges aggregating $4.3 million and $4.0 million for the years ended December 31, 2020 and 2019, respectively, where the carrying amounts of the properties exceed the estimated undiscounted cash flows expected to be received during the assumed holding period which includes the estimated sales value expected to be received at disposition. The impairment charges were attributable to the effect of adding asset retirement costs to certain properties due to changes in estimates associated with our environmental liabilities, which increased the carrying values of these properties in excess of their fair values, reductions in estimated undiscounted cash flows expected to be received during the assumed holding period for certain of our properties, and reductions in estimated sales prices from third-party offers based on signed

contracts, letters of intent or indicative bids for certain of our properties. The evaluation and estimates of anticipated cash flows used to conduct our impairment analysis are highly subjective and actual results could vary significantly from our estimates. For a discussion of the risks associated with asset impairments, see “Item 1A. Risk Factors – Our assets may be subject to impairment charges.”

Supplemental Non-GAAP Measures

We manage our business to enhance the value of our real estate portfolio and, as a REIT, place particular emphasis on minimizing risk, to the extent feasible, and generating cash sufficient to make required distributions to stockholders of at least 90% of our ordinary taxable income each year. In addition to measurements defined by GAAP, we also focus on Funds From Operations (“FFO”) and Adjusted Funds From Operations (“AFFO”) to measure our performance. FFO and AFFO are generally considered by analysts and investors to be appropriate supplemental non-GAAP measures of the performance of REITs. FFO and AFFO are not in accordance with, or a substitute for, measures prepared in accordance with GAAP. In addition, FFO and AFFO are not based on any comprehensive set of accounting rules or principles. Neither FFO nor AFFO represent cash generated from operating activities calculated in accordance with GAAP and therefore these measures should not be considered an alternative for GAAP net earnings or as a measure of liquidity. These measures should only be used to evaluate our performance in conjunction with corresponding GAAP measures.

FFO is defined by the National Association of Real Estate Investment Trusts (“NAREIT”) as GAAP net earnings before depreciation and amortization of real estate assets, gains or losses on dispositions of real estate, impairment charges and the cumulative effect of accounting changes. Our definition of AFFO is defined as FFO less (i) certain revenue recognition adjustments (defined below), (ii) changes in environmental estimates, (iii) accretion expense, (iv) environmental litigation accruals, (v) insurance reimbursements, (vi) legal settlements and judgments, (vii) acquisition costs expensed and (viii) other unusual items that are not reflective of our core operating performance. Other REITs may use definitions of FFO and/or AFFO that are different from ours and, accordingly, may not be comparable.

We believe that FFO and AFFO are helpful to analysts and investors in measuring our performance because both FFO and AFFO exclude various items included in GAAP net earnings that do not relate to, or are not indicative of, our core operating performance. Specifically, FFO excludes items such as depreciation and amortization of real estate assets, gains or losses on dispositions of real estate, and impairment charges. However, GAAP net earnings and FFO typically include certain other items that the we exclude from AFFO, including the impact of revenue recognition adjustments comprised of deferred rental revenue (straight-line rental revenue), the net amortization of above-market and below-market leases, adjustments recorded for the recognition of rental income from direct financing leases and the amortization of deferred lease incentives (collectively, “Revenue Recognition Adjustments”) that do not impact our recurring cash flow and which are not indicative of our core operating performance. Deferred rental revenue results primarily from fixed rental increases scheduled under certain leases with our tenants. In accordance with GAAP, the aggregate minimum rent due over the current term of these leases is recognized on a straight-line basis rather than when payment is contractually due. The present value of the difference between the fair market rent and the contractual rent for in-place leases at the time properties are acquired is amortized into revenues from rental properties over the remaining lives of the in-place leases. Income from direct financing leases is recognized over the lease terms using the effective interest method, which produces a constant periodic rate of return on the net investments in the leased properties. The amortization of deferred lease incentives represents our funding commitment in certain leases, which deferred expense is recognized on a straight-line basis as a reduction of rental revenue. GAAP net earnings and FFO also include non-cash and/or unusual items such as changes in environmental estimates, environmental accretion expense, allowances for credit loss on notes and mortgages receivable and direct finance leases, environmental litigation accruals, insurance reimbursements, legal settlements and judgments, property acquisition costs expensed and loss on extinguishment of debt, that do not impact our recurring cash flow and which are not indicative of our core operating performance.

We pay particular attention to AFFO which we believe provides a more accurate depiction of our core operating performance than either GAAP net earnings or FFO. By providing AFFO, we believe that we are presenting useful information that assists analysts and investors to better assess our core operating performance. Further, we believe that AFFO is useful in comparing the sustainability of our core operating performance with the sustainability of the core operating performance of other real estate companies.

A reconciliation of net earnings to FFO and AFFO is as follows (in thousands, except per share amounts):

Year ended December 31,

Gains on dispositions of real estate (4,548 ) (1,063 ) (3,948 )

Revenue recognition adjustments 895 (960 ) (2,223 )

Loss on extinguishment of debt 1,233 — —

Changes in environmental estimates (3,135 ) (5,386 ) (1,319 )

Environmental litigation accruals 85 5,896 (45 )

Basic per share amounts:

Funds from operations per share 2.32 1.86 1.81

Adjusted funds from operations per share $ 1.85 $ 1.72 $ 1.71

Diluted per share amounts:

Funds from operations per share 2.31 1.86 1.80

Adjusted funds from operations per share $ 1.84 $ 1.72 $ 1.71

Weighted average common shares outstanding:

Results of Operations

Year ended December 31, 2020, compared to year ended December 31, 2019

Revenues from rental properties increased by $6.9 million to $144.6 million for the year ended December 31, 2020, as compared to $137.7 million for the year ended December 31, 2019. The increase in revenues from rental properties was primarily due to $6.1 million of revenue from the properties acquired in 2020. Rental income contractually due from our tenants included in revenues from rental properties was $128.2 million for the year ended December 31, 2020, as compared to $119.3 million for the year ended December 31, 2019. Tenant reimbursements, which are included in revenues from rental properties, and which consist of real estate taxes and other municipal charges paid by us which are reimbursable by our tenants pursuant to the terms of triple-net lease agreements, were $17.3 million and $17.5 million for the years ended December 31, 2020 and 2019, respectively. Interest income on notes and mortgages receivable was $2.7 million for the year ended December 31, 2020, as compared to $2.9 million for the year ended December 31, 2019.

In accordance with GAAP, we recognize revenues from rental properties in amounts which vary from the amount of rent contractually due during the periods presented. As a result, revenues from rental properties include Revenue Recognition Adjustments comprised of non-cash adjustments recorded for deferred rental revenue due to the recognition of rental income on a straight-line basis over the current lease term, the net amortization of above-market and below-market leases, recognition of rental income under direct financing leases using the effective interest rate method which produces a constant periodic rate of return on the net investments in the leased properties and the amortization of deferred lease incentives. Revenues from rental properties include Revenue Recognition Adjustments which decreased rental revenue by $0.9 million and increased rental revenue by $1.0 million for the years ended December 31, 2020 and 2019, respectively.

Property costs, which are primarily comprised of rent expense, real estate and other state and local taxes, municipal charges, professional fees, maintenance expense and reimbursable tenant expenses, were $23.5 million for the year ended December 31, 2020, as compared to $25.0 million for the year ended December 31, 2019. The decrease in property costs for the year ended December 31, 2020, was principally due to a decrease in rent expense, professional fees related to property redevelopments and reimbursable real estate taxes partially offset by an increase in other professional fees.

Impairment charges were $4.3 million for the year ended December 31,2020, as compared to $4.0 million for the year ended December 31,2019. Impairment charges are recorded when the carrying value of a property is reduced to fair value. Impairment charges for the years ended December 31,2020 and2019, were attributable to the effect of adding asset retirement costs to certain properties due to changes in estimates associated with our environmental liabilities, which increased the carrying values of theseproperties in excess of their fair values, reductions in estimated undiscounted cash flows expected to be received during the assumed holding period for certain of our properties, and reductions in estimated sales prices from third-party offers based on signed contracts, letters of intent or indicative bids for certain of our properties.

Environmental expenses were $1.1 million for the year ended December 31, 2020, as compared to $5.4 million for the year ended December 31, 2019. The decrease in environmental expenses for the year ended December 31, 2020, was principally due to a $5.8 million decrease in environmental litigation accruals and a $0.6 million decrease in environmental legal and professional fees, partially offset by a $2.1 million change in net environmental remediation costs and estimates. Environmental expenses vary from period to period and, accordingly, undue reliance should not be placed on the magnitude or the direction of change in reported environmental expenses for one period, as compared to prior periods.

General and administrative expense was $17.3 million for the year ended December 31, 2020, as compared to $15.4 million for the year ended December 31, 2019. The increase in general and administrative expense for the year ended December 31, 2020, was principally due to a $0.7 million increase in stock-based compensation, a $0.7 million increase in other employee-related expenses and a $0.6 million increase in legal and other professional fees.

Depreciation and amortization expense was $30.2 million for the year ended December 31, 2020, as compared to $25.2 million for the year ended December 31, 2019. The increase in depreciation and amortization expense was primarily due to depreciation and amortization of properties acquired offset by a decrease in depreciation charges related to asset retirement costs, the effect of certain assets becoming fully depreciated, lease terminations and dispositions of real estate.

Gains on dispositions of real estate were $4.5 million for the year ended December 31, 2020, as compared to $1.1 million for the year ended December 31, 2019. The gains were the result of the sale of 11 and nine properties during the years ended December 31, 2020 and 2019, respectively.

Other income was $21.1 million for the year ended December 31, 2020, as compared to $7.6 million for the year ended December 31, 2019. For the year ended December 31, 2020, other income was primarily attributable to $21.3 million received from legal settlements and judgments and $0.1 million received from environmental insurance reimbursements, partially offset by a $0.4 million allowance for credit loss on notes and mortgages receivable and direct financings leases. Other income for the year ended December 31, 2019, was primarily attributable to $4.9 million received from environmental insurance reimbursements and $2.7 million received from legal settlements and judgments.

Interest expense was $26.1 million for the year ended December 31, 2020, as compared to $24.6 million for the year ended December 31, 2019. The increase was due to higher average borrowings outstanding for the year ended December 31, 2020, as compared to the year ended December 31, 2019.

For the year ended December 31, 2020, FFO was $99.3 million, as compared to $77.8 million for the year ended December 31, 2019. For the year ended December 31, 2020, AFFO was $79.1 million, as compared to $71.8 million for the year ended December 31, 2019. FFO for the year ended December 31, 2020, was impacted by changes in net earnings, but excludes a $0.3 million increase in impairment charges, a $5.0 million increase in depreciation and amortization expense and a $3.4 million increase in gains on dispositions of real estate. The increase in AFFO for the year ended December 31, 2020, also excludes a $18.6 million increase in legal settlements and judgments, a $2.1 million increase in environmental estimates and accretion expense, a $4.8 million decrease in insurance reimbursements, a $5.8 million decrease in environmental litigation accruals, a $1.9 million decrease in Revenue Recognition Adjustments, a $1.2 million increase in loss on extinguishment of debt and a $0.4 million allowance for credit loss on notes and mortgages receivable and direct financing leases.

Basic and diluted earnings per share was $1.62 per share for the year ended December 31, 2020, as compared to $1.19 per share for the year ended December 31, 2019. Basic and diluted FFO per share for the year ended December 31, 2020, was $2.31 per share as compared to $1.86 per share, for the year ended December 31, 2019. Basic and diluted AFFO per share for the year ended December 31, 2020, was $1.85 and $1.84 per share, respectively, as compared to $1.72 per share for the year ended December 31, 2019.

Liquidity and Capital Resources

Our principal sources of liquidity are the cash flows from our operations, funds available under our Revolving Facility (which is scheduled to mature in March 2022), proceeds from the sale of shares of our common stock through offerings from time to time under our ATM Program, and available cash and cash equivalents. Our business operations and liquidity are dependent on our ability to generate cash flow from our properties. We believe that our operating cash needs for the next twelve months can be met by cash flows from operations, borrowings under our Revolving Facility, proceeds from the sale of shares of our common stock under our ATM Program and available cash and cash equivalents.

Our cash flow activities for the years ended December 31,2020,2019 and2018, are summarized as follows (in thousands):

Year ended December 31,

Operating Activities

Net cash flow from operating activities increased by $6.0 million for the year ended December 31, 2020, to $82.8 million, as compared to $76.8 million for the year ended December 31, 2019. Net cash provided by operating activities represents cash received primarily from rental and interest income less cash used for property costs, environmental expense, general and administrative expense and interest expense. The change in net cash flow provided by operating activities for the years ended December 31, 2020, 2019 and 2018, is primarily the result of changes in revenues and expenses as discussed in “Results of Operations” above and the other changes in assets and liabilities on our consolidated statements of cash flows.

Investing Activities

Our investing activities are primarily real estate-related transactions. Because we generally lease our properties on a triple-net basis, we have not historically incurred significant capital expenditures other than those related to investments in real estate and our redevelopment activities. Net cash flow used in investing activities increased by $44.8 million for the year ended December 31, 2020, to a use of $127.4 million, as compared to a use of $82.6 million for the year ended December 31, 2019. The increase in net cash flow from investing activities for the year ended December 31, 2020, was primarily due to an increase of $62.8 million of property acquisitions a $2.4 million increase in issuance of notes receivable and a $1.9 million increase in deposits for property acquisitions, partially offset by an increase of $18.6 million in collections of notes and mortgages receivable and an increase of $3.8 million in proceeds from dispositions of real estate.

Financing Activities

Net cash flow provided by financing activities increased by $97.3 million for the year ended December 31, 2020, to $78.0 million, as compared to a use of $19.3 million for the year ended December 31, 2019. The increase in net cash flow from financing activities for the year ended December 31, 2020, was primarily due to an increase in net borrowings of $54.0 million and an increase in net proceeds from issuances of common stock of $49.0 million, partially offset by an increase in dividends paid of $5.7 million.

Credit Agreement

On June 2, 2015, we entered into a $225.0 million senior unsecured credit agreement (the “Credit Agreement”) with a group of banks led by Bank of America, N.A. The Credit Agreement consisted of a $175.0 million unsecured revolving credit facility (the “Revolving Facility”) and a $50.0 million unsecured term loan (the “Term Loan”).

On March 23, 2018, we entered in to an amended and restated credit agreement (as amended, the “Restated Credit Agreement”) amending and restating our Credit Agreement. Pursuant to the Restated Credit Agreement, we (a) increased the borrowing capacity under the Revolving Facility from $175.0 million to $250.0 million, (b) extended the maturity date of the Revolving Facility from June 2018 to March 2022, (c) extended the maturity date of the Term Loan from June 2020 to March 2023 and (d) amended certain financial covenants and provisions.

Subject to the terms of the Restated Credit Agreement and our continued compliance with its provisions, we have the option to (a) extend the term of the Revolving Facility for one additional year to March 2023 and (b) request that the lenders approve an increase of up to $300.0 million in the amount of the Revolving Facility and/or Term Loan to $600.0 million in the aggregate.

The Restated Credit Agreement incurs interest and fees at various rates based on our total indebtedness to total asset value ratio at the end of each quarterly reporting period. The Revolving Facility permits borrowings at an interest rate equal to the sum of a base rate plus a margin of 0.50% to 1.30% or a LIBOR rate plus a margin of 1.50% to 2.30%. The annual commitment fee on the undrawn funds under the Revolving Facility is 0.15% to 0.25%. The Term Loan, prior to its repayment pursuant to a subsequent amendment to the Restated Credit Agreement, bore interest equal to the sum of a base rate plus a margin of 0.45% to 1.25% or a LIBOR rate plus a margin of 1.45% to 2.25%.

On September 19, 2018, we entered into an amendment (the “First Amendment”) of our Restated Credit Agreement. The First Amendment modifies the Restated Credit Agreement to, among other things: (i) reflect that we had previously entered into (a) an amended and restated note purchase and guarantee agreement with The Prudential Insurance Company of America (“Prudential”) and certain of its affiliates and (b) a note purchase and guarantee agreement with the Metropolitan Life Insurance Company (“MetLife”) and certain of its affiliates; and (ii) permit borrowings under each of the Revolving Facility and the Term Loan at three different interest rates, including a rate based on the LIBOR Daily Floating Rate (as defined in the First Amendment) plus the Applicable Rate (as defined in the First Amendment) for such facility.

On September 12, 2019, in connection with prepayment of the Term Loan, we entered into a consent and amendment (the “Second Amendment”) of our Restated Credit Agreement. The Second Amendment modifies the Restated Credit Agreement to, among other things, (a) increase our borrowing capacity under the Revolving Facility from $250.0 million to $300.0 million and (b) decrease lender commitments under the Term Loan to $0.0 million.

On December 14, 2020, we used a portion of the net proceeds from the Series I Notes, Series J Notes and Series K Notes (each as described below) to repay $75.0 million of borrowings outstanding under our Restated Credit Agreement.

Senior Unsecured Notes

On December 4, 2020, we entered into a fifth amended and restated note purchase and guarantee agreement (the “Fifth Amended and Restated Prudential Agreement”) with Prudential and certain of its affiliates amending and restating our existing fourth amended and restated note purchase agreement. Pursuant to the Fifth Amended and Restated Prudential Agreement, we agreed that our (a) 6.0% Series A Guaranteed Senior Notes due February 25, 2021, in the original aggregate principal amount of $100.0 million (the “Series A Notes”), (b) 5.35% Series B Guaranteed Senior Notes due June 2, 2023, in the original aggregate principal amount of $75.0 million (the “Series B Notes”), (c) 4.75% Series C Guaranteed Senior Notes due February 25, 2025, in the aggregate principal amount of $50.0 million (the “Series C Notes”) and (d) 5.47% Series D Guaranteed Senior Notes due June 21, 2028, in the aggregate principal amount of $50.0 million (the “Series D Notes”) and (e) 3.52% Series F Guaranteed Senior Notes due September 12, 2029, in the aggregate principal amount of $50.0 million (the “Series F Notes”) that were outstanding under the existing fourth restated prudential note purchase agreement would continue to remain outstanding under the Fifth Amended and Restated Prudential Agreement and we authorized and issued our 3.43% Series I Guaranteed Senior Notes due November 25, 2030, in the aggregate principal amount of $100.0 million (the “Series I Notes” and, together with the Series A Notes, Series B Notes, Series C Notes, Series D Notes and Series F Notes, the “Notes”) to Prudential. On December 4, 2020, we completed the early redemption of our 6.0% Series A Notes due February 25, 2021, in the original aggregate principal amount of $100.0 million. As a result of the early redemption, we recognized a $1.2 million loss on extinguishment of debt on our consolidated statement of operations for the year ended December 31, 2020. The Fifth Amended and Restated Prudential Agreement does not provide for scheduled reductions in the principal balance of the Series I Notes, or any of our previously issued Series B Notes, Series C Notes, Series D Notes, or Series F Notes prior to their respective maturities.

On June 21, 2018, we entered into a note purchase and guarantee agreement (the “MetLife Note Purchase Agreement”) with MetLife and certain of its affiliates. Pursuant to the MetLife Note Purchase Agreement, we authorized and issued our 5.47% Series E Guaranteed Senior Notes due June 21, 2028, in the aggregate principal amount of $50.0 million (the “Series E Notes”). The MetLife Note Purchase Agreement does not provide for scheduled reductions in the principal balance of the Series E Notes prior to their maturity.

On December 4, 2020, we entered into a first amendment to note purchase and guarantee agreement (the “First Amended and Restated AIG Agreement”) with American General Life Insurance Company amending and restating our existing note purchase and guarantee agreement. Pursuant to the First Amended and Restated AIG Agreement, we agreed that our 3.52% Series G Guaranteed Senior Notes due September 12, 2029, in the aggregate principal amount of $50.0 million (the “Series G Notes”) that were outstanding under the existing note purchase and guarantee agreement would continue to remain outstanding under the First Amended and Restated AIG Agreement and we authorized and issued our $50.0 million of 3.43% Series J Guaranteed Senior Notes due November 25, 2030 (the “Series J Notes”) to AIG. The First Amended and Restated AIG Agreement does not provide for scheduled reductions in the principal balance of the Series J Notes or any of our previously issued Series G Notes prior to their respective maturities.

On December 4, 2020, we entered into a first amended and restated note purchase and guarantee agreement (the “First Amended and Restated MassMutual Agreement”) amending and restating our existing note purchase and guarantee agreement. Pursuant to the First Amended and Restated MassMutual Agreement, we agreed that our 3.52% Series H Guaranteed Senior Notes due September 12, 2029, in the aggregate principal amount of $25.0 million (the “Series H Notes”) that were outstanding under the existing note purchase and guarantee agreement would continue to remain outstanding under the First Amended and Restated MassMutual Agreement and we authorized and issued our $25.0 million of 3.43% Series K Guaranteed Senior Notes due November 25, 2030 (the “Series K Notes”) to MassMutual. The First Amended and Restated MassMutual Agreement does not provide for scheduled reductions in the principal balance of the Series K or any of our previously issued Series H Notes prior to their respective maturities.

We used the net proceeds from the issuance of the Series I Notes, Series J Notes and Series K Notes to prepay in full our Series A Notes due February 25, 2021, and repay $75.0 million of borrowings outstanding under our Restated Credit Agreement.

The Notes, the Series E Notes, the Series G Notes, the Series H Notes, the Series I Notes, the Series J Notes and, the Series K Notes, respectively issued thereunder, are collectively referred to as the “senior unsecured notes.”

Debt Maturities

The amounts outstanding under our Restated Credit Agreement and our senior unsecured notes, exclusive of extension options, are as follows (in thousands):

Maturity Date Interest Rate December 31, 2020 December 31, 2019

Unamortized debt issuance costs, net (a) (2,307 ) (2,949 )

As of December 31, 2020, we are in compliance with all of the material terms of the Restated Credit Agreement and our senior unsecured notes.

ATM Program

In March 2018, we established an at-the-market equity offering program (the “ATM Program”), pursuant to which we are able to issue and sell shares of our common stock with an aggregate sales price of up to $125.0 million through a consortium of banks acting as agents. Sales of the shares of common stock may be made, as needed, from time to time in at-the-market offerings as defined in Rule 415 of the Securities Act, including by means of ordinary brokers’ transactions on the New York Stock Exchange or otherwise at market prices prevailing at the time of sale, at prices related to prevailing market prices or as otherwise agreed to with the applicable agent.

During the years ended December 31, 2020 and 2019, we issued 2.2 million and 0.4 million shares of common stock and received net proceeds of $63.2 million and $14.2 million, respectively, under the ATM Program. Future sales, if any, will depend on a variety of factors to be determined by us from time to time, including among others, market conditions, the trading price of our common stock, determinations by us of the appropriate sources of funding for us and potential uses of funding available to us.

Property Acquisitions and Capital Expenditures

As part of our overall business strategy, we regularly review opportunities to acquire additional convenience stores, gasoline stations and other automotive-related and retail real estate, and we expect to continue to pursue acquisitions that we believe will benefit our financial performance.

During the year ended December 31, 2020, we acquired fee simple interests in 34 properties for an aggregate purchase price of $150.0 million. During the year ended December 31, 2019, we acquired fee simple interests in 27 properties for an aggregate purchase price of $87.2 million. We accounted for the acquisitions of fee simple interests as asset acquisitions. For additional information regarding our property acquisitions, see Note 13 in “Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data” in this Form 10-K.

We also seek opportunities to recapture select properties from our net lease portfolio and redevelop such properties either for a new convenience and gasoline use or for alternative single-tenant net lease retail uses. For the year ended December 31, 2020, we spent $0.3 million (net of write-offs) of construction-in-progress costs related to our redevelopment activities. For the year ended December 31, 2019, we spent $0.4 million (net of write-offs) of construction-in-progress costs related to our redevelopment activities.

Because we generally lease our properties on a triple-net basis, we have not historically incurred significant capital expenditures other than those related to acquisitions. However, our tenants frequently make improvements to the properties leased from us at their expense. As of December 31, 2020, we have a remaining commitment to fund up to $6.8 million in the aggregate in

capital improvements in certain properties previously leased to Marketing and now subject to unitary triple-net leases with other tenants.

Dividends

We elected to be treated as a REIT under the federal income tax laws with the year beginning January 1, 2001. To qualify for taxation as a REIT, we must, among other requirements such as those related to the composition of our assets and gross income, distribute annually to our stockholders at least 90% of our taxable income, including taxable income that is accrued by us without a corresponding receipt of cash. We cannot provide any assurance that our cash flows will permit us to continue paying cash dividends.

It is also possible that instead of distributing 100% of our taxable income on an annual basis, we may decide to retain a portion of our taxable income and to pay taxes on such amounts as permitted by the Internal Revenue Service. Payment of dividends is subject to market conditions, our financial condition, including but not limited to, our continued compliance with the provisions of the Restated Credit Agreement, our senior unsecured notes and other factors, and therefore is not assured. In particular, the Restated Credit Agreement and our senior unsecured notes prohibit the payment of dividends during certain events of default.

Regular quarterly dividends paid to our stockholders aggregated $62.6 million, $56.9 million and $50.5 million for the years ended December 31, 2020, 2019 and 2018, respectively. There can be no assurance that we will continue to pay dividends at historical rates.

Contractual Obligations

Our significant contractual obligations and commitments, excluding extension options and unamortized debt issuance costs, as of December 31, 2020, were comprised of borrowings under the credit agreement, our senior unsecured notes, operating and finance lease payments due to landlords, estimated environmental remediation expenditures and our funding commitments for capital improvements at certain properties.

In addition, as a REIT, we are required to pay dividends equal to at least 90% of our taxable income in order to continue to qualify as a REIT. Our contractual obligations and commitments as of December 31, 2020, exclusive of extension options and unamortized debt issuance costs, are summarized below (in thousands):

Generally, leases with our tenants are triple-net leases with the tenant responsible for the operations conducted at our properties and for the payment of taxes, maintenance, repair, insurance, environmental remediation and other operating expenses.

We have no significant contractual obligations that are not fully recorded on our consolidated balance sheets or fully disclosed in the notes to our consolidated financial statements. We have no off-balance sheet arrangements as defined in Item 303(a)(4)(ii) of Regulation S-K promulgated by the Exchange Act.

Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates

The consolidated financial statements included in this Form 10-K have been prepared in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America. The preparation of consolidated financial statements in accordance with GAAP requires us to make estimates, judgments and assumptions that affect the amounts reported in our consolidated financial statements. Although we have made estimates, judgments and assumptions regarding future uncertainties relating to the information included in

our consolidated financial statements, giving due consideration to the accounting policies selected and materiality, actual results could differ from these estimates, judgments and assumptions and such differences could be material.

Estimates, judgments and assumptions underlying the accompanying consolidated financial statements include, but are not limited to, real estate, receivables, deferred rent receivable, direct financing leases, depreciation and amortization, impairment of long-lived assets, environmental remediation obligations, litigation, accrued liabilities, income taxes and the allocation of the purchase price of properties acquired to the assets acquired and liabilities assumed. The information included in our consolidated financial statements that is based on estimates, judgments and assumptions is subject to significant change and is adjusted as circumstances change and as the uncertainties become more clearly defined.

Our accounting policies are described in Note 1 in “Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data”. The SEC’s Financial Reporting Release (“FRR”) No. 60, Cautionary Advice Regarding Disclosure About Critical Accounting Policies (“FRR 60”), suggests that companies provide additional disclosure on those accounting policies considered most critical. FRR 60 considers an accounting policy to be critical if it is important to our financial condition and results of operations and requires significant judgment and estimates on the part of management in its application. We believe that our most critical accounting policies relate to revenue recognition and deferred rent receivable, direct financing leases, impairment of long-lived assets, environmental remediation obligations, litigation, income taxes, and the allocation of the purchase price of properties acquired to the assets acquired and liabilities assumed as described below.

Revenue Recognition

We earn revenue primarily from operating leases with our tenants. We recognize income under leases with our tenants, on the straight-line method, which effectively recognizes contractual lease payments evenly over the current term of the leases. The present value of the difference between the fair market rent and the contractual rent for in-place leases at the time properties are acquired is amortized into revenue from rental properties over the remaining lives of the in-place leases. A critical assumption in applying the straight-line accounting method is that the tenant will make all contractual lease payments during the current lease term and that the net deferred rent receivable balance will be collected when the payment is due, in accordance with the annual rent escalations provided for in the leases. We may be required to reserve, or provide reserves for a portion of, the recorded deferred rent receivable if it becomes apparent that the tenant may not make all of its contractual lease payments when due during the current term of the lease.

Direct Financing Leases

Income under direct financing leases is included in revenues from rental properties and is recognized over the lease terms using the effective interest rate method which produces a constant periodic rate of return on the net investments in the leased properties. The investments in direct financing leases represents the investments in leased assets accounted for as direct financing leases. The investments in direct financing leases are increased for interest income earned and amortized over the life of the leases and reduced by the receipt of lease payments.

Impairment of Long-Lived Assets

Real estate assets represent “long-lived” assets for accounting purposes. We review the recorded value of long-lived assets for impairment in value whenever any events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying amount of the assets may not be recoverable. We may become aware of indicators of potentially impaired assets upon tenant or landlord lease renewals, upon receipt of notices of potential governmental takings and zoning issues, or upon other events that occur in the normal course of business that would cause us to review the operating results of the property. We believe our real estate assets are not carried at amounts in excess of their estimated net realizable fair value amounts.

Environmental Remediation Obligations

We provide for the estimated fair value of future environmental remediation obligations when it is probable that a liability has been incurred and a reasonable estimate of fair value can be made. See “Environmental Matters” below for additional information. Environmental liabilities net of related recoveries are measured based on their expected future cash flows which have been adjusted for inflation and discounted to present value. Since environmental exposures are difficult to assess and estimate and knowledge about these liabilities is not known upon the occurrence of a single event, but rather is gained over a continuum of events, we believe that it is appropriate that our accrual estimates are adjusted as the remediation treatment progresses, as circumstances change and as environmental contingencies become more clearly defined and reasonably estimable. A critical assumption in accruing for these liabilities is that the state environmental laws and regulations will be administered and enforced in the future in a manner that is consistent with past practices. Environmental liabilities are estimated net of recoveries of environmental costs from state UST remediation funds, with respect to past and future spending based on estimated recovery rates developed from our experience with the funds when such recoveries are considered probable. A critical assumption in accruing for these recoveries is that the state UST fund programs will be administered and funded in the future in a manner that is consistent with past practices and that future environmental spending will be eligible for reimbursement at historical rates under these programs. We accrue environmental liabilities based on our

share of responsibility as defined in our lease contracts with our tenants and under various other agreements with others or if circumstances indicate that our counterparty may not have the financial resources to pay its share of the costs. It is possible that our assumptions regarding the ultimate allocation method and share of responsibility that we used to allocate environmental liabilities may change, which may result in material adjustments to the amounts recorded for environmental litigation accruals and environmental remediation liabilities. We may ultimately be responsible to pay for environmental liabilities as the property owner if our tenants or other counterparties fail to pay them. In certain environmental matters the effect on future financial results is not subject to reasonable estimation because considerable uncertainty exists both in terms of the probability of loss and the estimate of such loss. The ultimate liabilities resulting from such lawsuits and claims, if any, may be material to our results of operations in the period in which they are recognized.

Litigation

Legal fees related to litigation are expensed as legal services are performed. We provide for litigation accruals, including certain litigation related to environmental matters (see “Environmental Litigation” below for additional information), when it is probable that a liability has been incurred and a reasonable estimate of the liability can be made. If the estimate of the liability can only be identified as a range, and no amount within the range is a better estimate than any other amount, the minimum of the range is accrued for the liability.

Income Taxes

Our financial results generally do not reflect provisions for current or deferred federal income taxes because we elected to be treated as a REIT under the federal income tax laws effective January 1, 2001. Our intention is to operate in a manner that will allow us to continue to be treated as a REIT and, as a result, we do not expect to pay substantial corporate-level federal income taxes. Many of the REIT requirements, however, are highly technical and complex. If we were to fail to meet the requirements, we may be subject to federal income tax, excise taxes, penalties and interest or we may have to pay a deficiency dividend to eliminate any earnings and profits that were not distributed. Certain states do not follow the federal REIT rules and we have included provisions for these taxes in property costs.

Allocation of the Purchase Price of Properties Acquired

Upon acquisition of real estate and leasehold interests, we estimate the fair value of acquired tangible assets (consisting of land, buildings and improvements) “as if vacant” and identified intangible assets and liabilities (consisting of leasehold interests, above-market and below-market leases, in-place leases and tenant relationships) and assumed debt. Based on these estimates, we allocate the purchase price to the applicable assets and liabilities.Assumptions used are property and geographic specific and may include, among other things, capitalization rates, market rental rates and EBITDA to rent coverage ratios.

Environmental Matters

General

We are subject to numerous federal, state and local laws and regulations, including matters relating to the protection of the environment such as the remediation of known contamination and the retirement and decommissioning or removal of long-lived assets including buildings containing hazardous materials, USTs and other equipment. Environmental costs are principally attributable to remediation costs which are incurred for, among other things, removing USTs, excavation of contaminated soil and water, installing, operating, maintaining and decommissioning remediation systems, monitoring contamination and governmental agency compliance reporting required in connection with contaminated properties.

We enter into leases and various other agreements which contractually allocate responsibility between the parties for known and unknown environmental liabilities at or relating to the subject properties. We are contingently liable for these environmental obligations in the event that our tenant does not satisfy them, and we are required to accrue for environmental liabilities that we believe are allocable to others under our leases if we determine that it is probable that our tenant will not meet its environmental obligations. It is possible that our assumptions regarding the ultimate allocation method and share of responsibility that we used to allocate environmental liabilities may change, which may result in material adjustments to the amounts recorded for environmental litigation accruals and environmental remediation liabilities. We assess whether to accrue for environmental liabilities based upon relevant factors including our tenants’ histories of paying for such obligations, our assessment of their financial capability, and their intent to pay for such obligations. However, there can be no assurance that our assessments are correct or that our tenants who have paid their obligations in the past will continue to do so. We may ultimately be responsible to pay for environmental liabilities as the property owner if our tenant fails to pay them.

value of cost for each component of the liability, net of estimated recoveries from state UST remediation funds considering estimated recovery rates developed from prior experience with the funds.

For substantially all of our triple-net leases, our tenants are contractually responsible for compliance with environmental laws and regulations, removal of USTs at the end of their lease term (the cost of which in certain cases is partially borne by us) and remediation of any environmental contamination that arises during the term of their tenancy. Under the terms of our leases covering properties previously leased to Marketing (substantially all of which commenced in 2012), we have agreed to be responsible for environmental contamination at the premises that was known at the time the lease commenced, and for environmental contamination which existed prior to commencement of the lease and is discovered (other than as a result of a voluntary site investigation) during the first 10 years of the lease term (or a shorter period for a minority of such leases). After expiration of such 10-year (or, in certain cases, shorter) period, responsibility for all newly discovered contamination, even if it relates to periods prior to commencement of the lease, is contractually allocated to our tenant. Our tenants at properties previously leased to Marketing are in all cases responsible for the cost of any remediation of contamination that results from their use and occupancy of our properties. Under substantially all of our other triple-net leases, responsibility for remediation of all environmental contamination discovered during the term of the lease (including known and unknown contamination that existed prior to commencement of the lease) is the responsibility of our tenant.

We anticipate that a majority of the USTs at properties previously leased to Marketing will be replaced over the next several years because these USTs are either at or near the end of their useful lives. For long-term, triple-net leases covering sites previously leased to Marketing, our tenants are responsible for the cost of removal and replacement of USTs and for remediation of contamination found during such UST removal and replacement, unless such contamination was found during the first 10 years of the lease term and also existed prior to commencement of the lease. In those cases, we are responsible for costs associated with the remediation of such preexisting contamination. We have also agreed to be responsible for environmental contamination that existed prior to the sale of certain properties assuming the contamination is discovered (other than as a result of a voluntary site investigation) during the first five years after the sale of the properties.

In the course of certain UST removals and replacements at properties previously leased to Marketing where we retained continuing responsibility for preexisting environmental obligations, previously unknown environmental contamination was and continues to be discovered. As a result, we have developed an estimate of fair value for the prospective future environmental liability resulting from preexisting unknown environmental contamination and have accrued for these estimated costs. These estimates are based primarily upon quantifiable trends which we believe allow us to make reasonable estimates of fair value for the future costs of environmental remediation resulting from the removal and replacement of USTs. Our accrual of the additional liability represents our estimate of the fair value of cost for each component of the liability, net of estimated recoveries from state UST remediation funds considering estimated recovery rates developed from prior experience with the funds. In arriving at our accrual, we analyzed the ages of USTs at properties where we would be responsible for preexisting contamination found within 10 years after commencement of a lease (for properties subject to long-term triple-net leases) or five years from a sale (for divested properties), and projected a cost to closure for preexisting unknown environmental contamination.

We measure our environmental remediation liabilities at fair value based on expected future net cash flows, adjusted for inflation (using a range of 2.0% to 2.75%), and then discount them to present value (using a range of 4.0% to 7.0%). We adjust our environmental remediation liabilities quarterly to reflect changes in projected expenditures, changes in present value due to the passage of time and reductions in estimated liabilities as a result of actual expenditures incurred during each quarter. As of December 31, 2020, we had accrued a total of $48.1 million for our prospective environmental remediation obligations. This accrual consisted of (a) $11.7 million, which was our estimate of reasonably estimable environmental remediation liability, including obligations to remove USTs for which we are responsible, net of estimated recoveries and (b) $36.4 million for future environmental liabilities related to preexisting unknown contamination. As of December 31, 2019, we had accrued a total of $50.7 million for our prospective environmental remediation obligations. This accrual consisted of (a) $12.4 million, which was our estimate of reasonably estimable environmental remediation liability, including obligations to remove USTs for which we are responsible, net of estimated recoveries and (b) $38.3 million for future environmental liabilities related to preexisting unknown contamination.

Environmental liabilities are accreted for the change in present value due to the passage of time and, accordingly, $1.8 million, $2.0 million and $2.4 million of net accretion expense was recorded for the years ended December 31, 2020, 2019 and 2018, respectively, which is included in environmental expenses. In addition, during the years ended December 31, 2020, 2019 and 2018, we recorded credits to environmental expenses aggregating $3.1 million, $5.4 million and $1.3 million, respectively, where decreases in estimated remediation costs exceeded the depreciated carrying value of previously capitalized asset retirement costs. Environmental expenses also include project management fees, legal fees and environmental litigation accruals.

During the years ended December 31, 2020 and 2019, we increased the carrying values of certain of our properties by $2.6 million and $1.9 million, respectively, due to changes in estimated environmental remediation costs. The recognition and subsequent changes in estimates in environmental liabilities and the increase or decrease in carrying values of the properties are non-cash transactions which do not appear on our consolidated statements of cash flows.

Capitalized asset retirement costs are being depreciated over the estimated remaining life of the UST, a 10-year period if the increase in carrying value is related to environmental remediation obligations or such shorter period if circumstances warrant, such as the remaining lease term for properties we lease from others. Depreciation and amortization expense related to capitalized asset retirement costs in our consolidated statements of operations for the years ended December 31, 2020, 2019 and 2018, were $4.0 million, $4.1million and $4.3 million, respectively. Capitalized asset retirement costs were $39.6 million (consisting of $23.6 million of known environmental liabilities and $16.0 million of reserves for future environmental liabilities) as of December 31, 2020, and $39.7 million (consisting of $22.2 million of known environmental liabilities and $17.5 million of reserves for future environmental liabilities) as of December 31, 2019. We recorded impairment charges aggregating $3.5 million and $3.7 million for the years ended December 31, 2020 and 2019, respectively, for capitalized asset retirement costs.

Environmental exposures are difficult to assess and estimate for numerous reasons, including the amount of data available upon initial assessment of contamination, alternative treatment methods that may be applied, location of the property which subjects it to differing local laws and regulations and their interpretations, changes in costs associated with environmental remediation services and equipment, the availability of state UST remediation funds and the possibility of existing legal claims giving rise to allocation of responsibilities to others, as well as the time it takes to remediate contamination and receive regulatory approval. In developing our liability for estimated environmental remediation obligations on a property by property basis, we consider, among other things, laws and regulations, assessments of contamination and surrounding geology, quality of information available, currently available technologies for treatment, alternative methods of remediation and prior experience. Environmental accruals are based on estimates derived upon facts known to us at this time, which are subject to significant change as circumstances change, and as environmental contingencies become more clearly defined and reasonably estimable.

Any changes to our estimates or our assumptions that form the basis of our estimates may result in our providing an accrual, or adjustments to the amounts recorded, for environmental remediation liabilities.

In July 2012, we purchased a 10-year pollution legal liability insurance policy covering substantially all of our properties at that time for preexisting unknown environmental liabilities and new environmental events. The policy has a $50.0 million aggregate limit and is subject to various self-insured retentions and other conditions and limitations. Our intention in purchasing this policy was to obtain protection predominantly for significant events. In addition to the environmental insurance policy purchased by the Company, we also took assignment of certain environmental insurance policies, and rights to reimbursement for claims made thereunder, from Marketing, by order of the U.S. Bankruptcy Court during Marketing’s bankruptcy proceedings. Under these assigned polices, we have received and expect to continue to receive reimbursement of certain remediation expenses for covered claims.

In light of the uncertainties associated with environmental expenditure contingencies, we are unable to estimate ranges in excess of the amount accrued with any certainty; however, we believe that it is possible that the fair value of future actual net expenditures could be substantially higher than amounts currently recorded by us. Adjustments to accrued liabilities for environmental remediation obligations will be reflected in our consolidated financial statements as they become probable and a reasonable estimate of fair value can be made.

Environmental Litigation

We are subject to various legal proceedings and claims which arise in the ordinary course of our business. As of December 31, 2020 and 2019, we had accrued $4.3 million and $17.8 million, respectively, for certain of these matters which we believe were appropriate based on information then currently available. It is possible that our assumptions regarding the ultimate allocation method and share of responsibility that we used to allocate environmental liabilities may change, which may result in our providing an accrual, or adjustments to the amounts recorded, for environmental litigation accruals. Matters related to our former Newark, New Jersey Terminal and the Lower Passaic River, our MTBE litigations in the states of Pennsylvania and Maryland, and our lawsuit with the State of New York pertaining to a property formerly owned by us in Uniondale, New York, in particular, could cause a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations, liquidity, ability to pay dividends or stock price. For additional information with respect to these and other pending environmental lawsuits and claims, see “Item 3. Legal Proceedings” and Note 3 in “Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data” in this Form 10-K.

Item 7A. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk

We are exposed to interest rate risk, primarily as a result of our $300.0 million senior unsecured credit agreement entered into on March 23, 2018, and amended on September 19, 2018 and September 12, 2019 (as amended, the “Restated Credit Agreement”), with a group of commercial banks led by Bank of America, N.A. The Restated Credit Agreement currently consists of a $300.0 million unsecured revolving facility (the “Revolving Facility”), which is scheduled to mature in March 2022. Subject to the terms of the Restated Credit Agreement and our continued compliance with its provisions, we have the option to (a) extend the term of the Revolving Facility for one additional year to March 2023 and (b) request that the lenders approve an increase of up to $300.0 million in the amount of the Revolving Facility to $600.0 million in the aggregate. The Restated Credit Agreement incurs interest and fees at various rates based on our total indebtedness to total asset value ratio at the end of each quarterly reporting period. The Revolving Facility permits borrowings at an interest rate equal to the sum of a base rate plus a margin of 0.50% to 1.30% or a LIBOR rate plus a

margin of 1.50% to 2.30%. The annual commitment fee on the undrawn funds under the Revolving Facility is 0.15% to 0.25%. We use borrowings under the Restated Credit Agreement to finance acquisitions and for general corporate purposes. Borrowings outstanding at variable interest rates under the Restated Credit Agreement as of December 31, 2020, were $25.0 million.

Based on our outstanding borrowings under the Restated Credit Agreement of $25.0 million for the year ended December 31, 2020, an increase in market interest rates of 1.0% for 2021 would decrease our 2021 net income and cash flows by approximately $0.3 million. This amount was determined by calculating the effect of a hypothetical interest rate change on our borrowings floating at market rates, and assumes that the $25.0 million outstanding borrowings under the Restated Credit Agreement is indicative of our future average floating interest rate borrowings for 2021 before considering additional borrowings required for future acquisitions or repayment of outstanding borrowings from proceeds of future equity offerings. The calculation also assumes that there are no other changes in our financial structure or the terms of our borrowings. Our exposure to fluctuations in interest rates will increase or decrease in the future with increases or decreases in the outstanding amount under our Restated Credit Agreement and with increases or decreases in amounts outstanding under borrowing agreements entered into with interest rates floating at market rates.

In order to minimize our exposure to credit risk associated with financial instruments, we place our temporary cash investments, if any, with high credit quality institutions. Temporary cash investments, if any, are currently held in an overnight bank time deposit with JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. and these balances, at times, may exceed federally insurable limits.

As discussed elsewhere in this report, the COVID-19 pandemic may negatively impact our business and results of operations. As we cannot predict the duration or scope of COVID-19 there is potential for future negative financial impacts to our results that could be material. Our business and results of operations will be, and our financial condition may be, impacted by COVID-19 pandemic and such impact could be materially adverse. See “Part I. Item. 1A. Risk Factors” in this Annual Report on Form 10-K for additional information.

Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data

GETTY REALTY CORP. INDEX TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND

SUPPLEMENTARY DATA

Page

Consolidated Balance Sheets as of December 31, 2020 and 2019 45

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements 48

Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm 72

GETTY REALTY CORP. AND SUBSIDIARIES

CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS

(in thousands, except share data)

December 31, December 31,

ASSETS:

Real Estate:

Less accumulated depreciation and amortization (186,964 ) (165,892 )

Real estate held for sale, net 872 —

Investment in direct financing leases, net 77,238 82,366

Right-of-use assets - finance 763 987

LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY:

Borrowings under credit agreement $ 25,000 $ 20,000

Environmental remediation obligations 48,084 50,723

Accounts payable and accrued liabilities 47,081 60,958

Commitments and contingencies — —

Stockholders’ equity:

Preferred stock, $0.01 par value; 20,000,000 authorized; unissued — —

Dividends paid in excess of earnings (63,443 ) (67,102 )

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements.

GETTY REALTY CORP. AND SUBSIDIARIES

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS

(in thousands, except per share amounts)

Year ended December 31,

Revenues:

Operating expenses:

Loss on extinguishment of debt (1,233 ) — —

Basic earnings per common share:

Diluted earnings per common share:

Weighted average common shares outstanding:

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements.

GETTY REALTY CORP. AND SUBSIDIARIES

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS

(in thousands)

Year ended December 31,

CASH FLOWS FROM OPERATING ACTIVITIES:

Gains on dispositions of real estate (4,548 ) (1,063 ) (3,948 )

Loss on extinguishment of debt 1,233 — —

Amortization of above-market and below-market leases (314 ) (623 ) (808 )

Amortization of investment in direct financing leases 4,210 3,526 3,015

Changes in assets and liabilities:

Prepaid expenses and other assets (1,253 ) (503 ) (708 )

CASH FLOWS FROM INVESTING ACTIVITIES:

Addition to construction in progress (275 ) (365 ) (2,657 )

Deposits for property acquisitions (2,368 ) (510 ) (430 )

Issuance of notes and mortgages receivable (2,932 ) (464 ) (530 )

CASH FLOWS FROM FINANCING ACTIVITIES:

Repayments under senior unsecured notes (100,000 ) — —

Payment for extinguishment of debt (1,233 ) — —

Payments of finance lease liability (650 ) (542 ) (468 )

Payments of debt issuance costs (410 ) (556 ) (3,393 )

Security deposits refunded (31 ) (347 ) (260 )

Payments in settlement of restricted stock units (257 ) (115 ) —

Net cash flow provided by (used in) financing activities 77,980 (19,299 ) 40,514

Change in cash, cash equivalents and restricted cash 33,390 (25,078 ) 27,929

Year ended December 31,

Supplemental disclosures of cash flow information

Cash paid during the period for:

Non-cash transactions

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements.

GETTY REALTY CORP. AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

NOTE 1. — SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES

Basis of Presentation

The consolidated financial statements include the accounts of Getty Realty Corp. and its wholly-owned subsidiaries. The accompanying consolidated financial statements have been prepared in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (“GAAP”). We do not distinguish our principal business or our operations on a geographical basis for purposes of measuring performance. We manage and evaluate our operations as a single segment. All significant intercompany accounts and transactions have been eliminated.

Use of Estimates, Judgments and Assumptions

The consolidated financial statements have been prepared in conformity with GAAP, which requires management to make estimates, judgments and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the consolidated financial statements and revenues and expenses during the period reported. Estimates, judgments and assumptions underlying the accompanying consolidated financial statements include, but are not limited to, real estate, receivables, deferred rent receivable, direct financing leases, depreciation and amortization, impairment of long-lived assets, environmental remediation costs, environmental remediation obligations, litigation, accrued liabilities, income taxes and the allocation of the purchase price of properties acquired to the assets acquired and liabilities assumed. Application of these estimates and assumptions requires exercise of judgment as to future uncertainties and, as a result, actual results could differ materially from these estimates.

Reclassifications

Certain prior year amounts have been reclassified to conform to current year presentation. Such reclassifications had no impact on previously reported net earnings.

Real Estate

Real estate assets are stated at cost less accumulated depreciation and amortization. For acquisitions of real estate we estimate the fair value of acquired tangible assets (consisting of land, buildings and improvements) “as if vacant” and identified intangible assets and liabilities (consisting of leasehold interests, above-market and below-market leases, in-place leases and tenant relationships) and assumed debt. Based on these estimates, we allocate the estimated fair value to the applicable assets and liabilities. Fair value is determined based on an exit price approach, which contemplates the price that would be received from the sale of an asset or paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement date. Assumptions used are property and geographic specific and may include, among other things, capitalization rates, market rental rates and EBITDA to rent coverage ratios.

We expense transaction costs associated with business combinations in the period incurred. Acquisitions of real estate which do not meet the definition of a business are accounted for as asset acquisitions. The accounting model for asset acquisitions is similar to the accounting model for business combinations except that the acquisition costs are capitalized and allocated to the individual assets acquired and liabilities assumed on a relative fair value basis. For additional information regarding property acquisitions, see Note 13 – Property Acquisitions.

We capitalize direct costs, including costs such as construction costs and professional services, and indirect costs associated with the development and construction of real estate assets while substantive activities are ongoing to prepare the assets for their intended use. The capitalization period begins when development activities are underway and ends when it is determined that the asset is substantially complete and ready for its intended use.

We evaluate the held for sale classification of our real estate as of the end of each quarter. Assets that are classified as held for sale are recorded at the lower of their carrying amount or fair value less costs to sell.

When real estate assets are sold or retired, the cost and related accumulated depreciation and amortization is eliminated from the respective accounts and any gain or loss is credited or charged to income. We evaluate real estate sale transactions where we provide seller financing to determine sale and gain recognition in accordance with GAAP. Expenditures for maintenance and repairs are charged to income when incurred.

Depreciation and Amortization

Depreciation of real estate is computed on the straight-line method based upon the estimated useful lives of the assets, which generally range from 16 to 25 years for buildings and improvements, or the term of the lease if shorter. Asset retirement costs are

depreciated over the shorter of the remaining useful lives of USTs or 10 years for asset retirement costs related to environmental remediation obligations, which costs are attributable to the group of assets identified at a property. Leasehold interests and in-place leases are amortized over the remaining term of the underlying lease.

Direct Financing Leases

Income under direct financing leases is included in revenues from rental properties and is recognized over the lease terms using the effective interest rate method which produces a constant periodic rate of return on the net investments in the leased properties. The investments in direct financing leases are increased for interest income earned and amortized over the life of the leases and reduced by the receipt of lease payments. We consider direct financing leases to be past-due or delinquent when a contractually required payment is not remitted in accordance with the provisions of the underlying agreement.

On June 16, 2016, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (the “FASB”) issued ASU 2016-13, Financial Instruments – Credit Losses (Topic 326): Measurements of Credit Losses on Financial Instruments (“ASU 2016-13”). The accounting standard became effective for us and was adopted on January 1, 2020. Upon adoption, we had five unitary leases subject to this standard classified as a direct financing leases with a net investment balance aggregating $82,366,000 prior to the credit loss adjustment. In these direct financing leases, the payment obligations of the lessees are collateralized by real estate properties. Historically, we have had no collection issues related to these direct financing leases; therefore, we assessed the probability of default on these leases based on the lessee’s financial condition, business prospects, remaining term of the lease, expected value of the underlying collateral upon its repossession, and our historical loss experience related to other leases in which we are the lessor. Based on the aforementioned considerations, we estimated a credit loss reserve related to these direct financing leases totaling $578,000, which was recognized as a cumulative adjustment to retained earnings and as a reduction of the investment in direct financing leases balance on our consolidated balance sheets on January 1, 2020. Periods prior to the adoption date that are presented for comparative purposes were not adjusted. During the year ended December 31, 2020, we recorded an additional allowance for credit losses of $340,000 on our net investments in direct financing leases due to changes in expected economic conditions, which was included within other income in our consolidated statements of operations.

We review our direct financing leases each reporting period to determine whether there were any indicators that the value of our net investments in direct financing leases may be impaired and adjust the allowance for any estimated changes in the credit loss with the resulting change recorded through our consolidated statement of operations. When determining a possible impairment, we take into consideration the collectability of direct financing lease receivables for which a reserve would be required. In addition, we determine whether there has been a permanent decline in the current estimate of the residual value of the property.

When we enter into a contract to sell properties that are recorded as direct financing leases, we evaluate whether we believe that it is probable that the disposition will occur. If we determine that the disposition is probable and therefore the property’s holding period is reduced, we record an allowance for credit losses to reflect the change in the estimate of the undiscounted future rents. Accordingly, the net investment balance is written down to fair value.

Notes and Mortgages Receivable

Notes and mortgages receivable consists of loans originated by us in conjunction with property dispositions and funding provided to tenants in conjunction with property acquisitions and capital improvements. Notes and mortgages receivable are recorded at stated principal amounts. In conjunction with our adoption of ASU 2016-13 on January 1, 2020, we estimate our credit loss reserve for our notes and mortgages receivable using the weighted average remaining maturity (“WARM”) method, which has been identified as an acceptable loss-rate method for estimating credit loss reserves in the FASB Staff Q&A Topic 326, No. 1. The WARM method requires us to reference historic loan loss data across a comparable data set and apply such loss rate to our notes and mortgages portfolio over its expected remaining term, taking into consideration expected economic conditions over the relevant timeframe. We applied the WARM method for our notes and mortgages portfolio, which share similar risk characteristics. Application of the WARM method to estimate a credit loss reserve requires significant judgment, including (i) the historical loan loss reference data, (ii) the expected timing and amount of loan repayments, and (iii) the current credit quality of our portfolio and our expectations of performance and market conditions over the relevant time period. To estimate the historic loan losses relevant to our portfolio, we used our historical loan performance since the launch of our loan origination business in 2013. Upon adoption of ASU 2016-13 on January 1, 2020, we recorded a credit loss reserve of $309,000, which was recognized as a cumulative adjustment to retained earnings and as a reduction of the aggregate outstanding principal balance of $30,855,000on the notes and mortgages receivable balance on our consolidated balance sheets on January 1, 2020. Periods prior to the adoption date that are presented for comparative purposes were not adjusted. In addition, during the year ended December 31, 2020, we recorded an additional allowance for credit losses of $28,000 on these notes and mortgages receivable due to changes in expected economic conditions, which was included within other income in our consolidated statements of operations.

From time to time, we may originate construction loans for the construction of income-producing properties. During the year ended December 31, 2020, we funded a construction loan in the amount of $2.9 million, which was repaid as of December 31, 2020, and we exercised our option to purchase the property. At December 31, 2020, there were no outstanding balances for construction

loans. Our construction loans generally provide for funding only during the construction phase, which is typically up to nine months, although our policy is to consider construction periods as long as 24 months. Funds are disbursed based on inspections in accordance with a schedule reflecting the completion of portions of the project. We also review and inspect each property before disbursement of funds during the term of the construction loan. At the end of the construction phase, the construction loan will be repaid with the proceeds from the sale of the property. We have the option to purchase the property at the end of the construction period.

Cash and Cash Equivalents

We consider all highly liquid investments with a maturity of three months or less when purchased to be cash equivalents. Our cash and cash equivalents are held in the custody of financial institutions, and these balances, at times, may exceed federally insurable limits.

Restricted Cash

Restricted cash consists of cash that is contractually restricted or held in escrow pursuant to various agreements with counterparties. At December 31, 2020 and 2019, restricted cash of $1,979,000 and $1,883,000, respectively, consisted of security deposits received from our tenants.

Revenue Recognition and Deferred Rent Receivable

On January 1, 2018, we adopted ASU 2014-09, Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606), (“Topic 606”) using the modified retrospective method applying it to any open contracts as of January 1, 2018. The new guidance provides a unified model to determine how revenue is recognized. To determine the proper amount of revenue to be recognized, we perform the following steps: (i) identify the contract with the customer, (ii) identify the performance obligations within the contract, (iii) determine the transaction price, (iv) allocate the transaction price to the performance obligations and (v) recognize revenue when (or as) a performance obligation is satisfied. Our primary source of revenue consists of revenue from rental properties and tenant reimbursements that is derived from leasing arrangements, which is specifically excluded from the standard, and thus had no material impact on our consolidated financial statements or notes to our consolidated financial statements as of December 31, 2020, 2019 and 2018.

Lease payments from operating leases are recognized on a straight-line basis over the term of the leases. The cumulative difference between lease revenue recognized under this method and the contractual lease payment terms is recorded as deferred rent receivable on our consolidated balance sheets. We review our accounts receivable, including its deferred rent receivable, related to base rents, straight-line rents, tenant reimbursements and other revenues for collectability. Our evaluation of collectability primarily consists of reviewing past due account balances and considers such factors as the credit quality of our tenant, historical trends of the tenant, changes in tenant payment terms, current economic trends, including the novel coronavirus (“COVID-19”) pandemic, and other facts and circumstances related to the applicable tenants. In addition, with respect to tenants in bankruptcy, we estimate the probable recovery through bankruptcy claims. If a tenant’s accounts receivable balance is considered uncollectable, we will write off the related receivable balances and cease to recognize lease income, including straight-line rent unless cash is received. If the collectability assessment subsequently changes to probable, any difference between the lease income that would have been recognized if collectability had always been assessed as probable and the lease income recognized to date, is recognized as a current-period adjustment to revenues from rental properties. Our reported net earnings are directly affected by our estimate of the collectability of our accounts receivable.

In April 2020, the FASB issued interpretive guidance relating to the accounting for lease concessions provided as a result of COVID-19. In this guidance, entities can elect not to apply lease modification accounting with respect to such lease concessions and instead, treat the concession as if it was a part of the existing contract. This guidance is only applicable to COVID-19 related lease concessions that do not result in a substantial increase in the rights of the lessor or the obligations of the lessee. Some concessions will provide a deferral of payments with no substantive changes to the consideration in the original contract. A deferral affects the timing of cash receipts, but the amount of the consideration is substantially the same as that required by the original contract. The FASB staff provides two ways to account for those deferrals:

(2) Account for the deferred payments as variable lease payments.

We elected to treat lease concessions with option (1) above for the year ended December 31, 2020.

The present value of the difference between the fair market rent and the contractual rent for above-market and below-market leases at the time properties are acquired is amortized into revenues from rental properties over the remaining terms of the in-place leases. Lease termination fees are recognized as other income when earned upon the termination of a tenant’s lease and relinquishment of space in which we have no further obligation to the tenant.

The sales of nonfinancial assets, such as real estate, are to be recognized when control of the asset transfers to the buyer, which will occur when the buyer has the ability to direct the use of or obtain substantially all of the remaining benefits from the asset. This generally occurs when the transaction closes and consideration is exchanged for control of the property.

Impairment of Long-Lived Assets

Assets are written down to fair value when events and circumstances indicate that the assets might be impaired and the projected undiscounted cash flows estimated to be generated by those assets are less than the carrying amount of those assets. Assets held for disposal are written down to fair value less estimated disposition costs.

We recorded impairment charges aggregating $4,258,000, $4,012,000 and $6,170,000 for the years ended December 31, 2020, 2019 and 2018, respectively. Our estimated fair values, as they relate to property carrying values, were primarily based upon (i) estimated sales prices from third-party offers based on signed contracts, letters of intent or indicative bids, for which we do not have access to the unobservable inputs used to determine these estimated fair values, and/or consideration of the amount that currently would be required to replace the asset, as adjusted for obsolescence (this method was used to determine $1,111,000 of the $4,258,000 in impairments recognized during the year ended December 31, 2020) and (ii) discounted cash flow models (this method was used to determine $117,000 of the $4,258,000 in impairments recognized during the year ended December 31, 2020). During the year ended December 31, 2020, we recorded $3,030,000 of the $4,258,000 in impairments recognized due to the accumulation of asset retirement costs as a result of changes in estimates associated with our estimated environmental liabilities which increased the carrying values of certain properties in excess of their fair values.For the years ended December 31, 2020, 2019 and 2018, impairment charges aggregating $932,000, $1,202,000 and $1,268,000, respectively, were related to properties that were previously disposed of by us.

The estimated fair value of real estate is based on the price that would be received from the sale of the property in an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement date. In general, we consider multiple internal valuation techniques when measuring the fair value of a property, all of which are based on unobservable inputs and assumptions that are classified within Level 3 of the Fair Value Hierarchy. These unobservable inputs include assumed holding periods ranging up to 15 years, assumed average rent increases of 2.0% annually, income capitalized at a rate of 8.0% and cash flows discounted at a rate of 7.0%. These assessments have a direct impact on our net income because recording an impairment loss results in an immediate negative adjustment to net income. The evaluation of anticipated cash flows is highly subjective and is based in part on assumptions regarding future rental rates and operating expenses that could differ materially from actual results in future periods. Where properties held for use have been identified as having a potential for sale, additional judgments are required related to the determination as to the appropriate period over which the projected undiscounted cash flows should include the operating cash flows and the amount included as the estimated residual value. This requires significant judgment. In some cases, the results of whether impairment is indicated are sensitive to changes in assumptions input into the estimates, including the holding period until expected sale.

Fair Value of Financial Instruments

All of our financial instruments are reflected in the accompanying consolidated balance sheets at amounts which, in our estimation based upon an interpretation of available market information and valuation methodologies, reasonably approximate their fair values, except those separately disclosed in the notes below.

The preparation of consolidated financial statements in accordance with GAAP requires management to make estimates of fair value that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosure of assets and liabilities at the date of the consolidated financial statements and revenues and expenses during the period reported using a hierarchy (the “Fair Value Hierarchy”) that prioritizes the inputs to valuation techniques used to measure the fair value. The Fair Value Hierarchy gives the highest priority to unadjusted quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities (Level 1 measurements) and the lowest priority to unobservable inputs (Level 3 measurements). The levels of the Fair Value Hierarchy are as follows: “Level 1” – inputs that reflect unadjusted quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities that we have the ability to access at the measurement date; “Level 2” – inputs other than quoted prices that are observable for the asset or liability either directly or indirectly, including inputs in markets that are not considered to be active; and “Level 3” – inputs that are unobservable. Certain types of assets and liabilities are recorded at fair value either on a recurring or non-recurring basis. Assets required or elected to be marked-to-market and reported at fair value every reporting period are valued on a recurring basis. Other assets not required to be recorded at fair value every period may be recorded at fair value if a specific provision or other impairment is recorded within the period to mark the carrying value of the asset to market as of the reporting date. Such assets are valued on a non-recurring basis.

Environmental Remediation Obligations

We record the fair value of a liability for an environmental remediation obligation as an asset and liability when there is a legal obligation associated with the retirement of a tangible long-lived asset and the liability can be reasonably estimated. Environmental remediation obligations are estimated based on the level and impact of contamination at each property. The accrued liability is the aggregate of our estimate of the fair value of cost for each component of the liability. The accrued liability is net of estimated recoveries from state UST remediation funds considering estimated recovery rates developed from prior experience with the funds.

Net environmental liabilities are currently measured based on their expected future cash flows which have been adjusted for inflation and discounted to present value. We accrue for environmental liabilities that we believe are allocable to other potentially responsible parties if it becomes probable that the other parties will not pay their environmental remediation obligations.

Litigation

Legal fees related to litigation are expensed as legal services are performed. We provide for litigation accruals, including certain litigation related to environmental matters, when it is probable that a liability has been incurred and a reasonable estimate of the liability can be made. If the estimate of the liability can only be identified as a range, and no amount within the range is a better estimate than any other amount, the minimum of the range is accrued for the liability. We accrue our share of environmental litigation liabilities based on our assumptions of the ultimate allocation method and share that will be used when determining our share of responsibility.

Income Taxes

We file a federal income tax return on which are consolidated our tax items and the tax items of our subsidiaries that are pass-through entities. Effective January 1, 2001, we elected to qualify, and believe that we are operating so as to qualify, as a REIT for federal income tax purposes. Accordingly, we generally will not be subject to federal income tax on qualifying REIT income, provided that distributions to our stockholders equal at least the amount of our taxable income as defined under the Internal Revenue Code. We accrue for uncertain tax matters when appropriate. The accrual for uncertain tax positions is adjusted as circumstances change and as the uncertainties become more clearly defined, such as when audits are settled or exposures expire. Tax returns for the years 2017, 2018 and 2019, and tax returns which will be filed for the year ended 2020, remain open to examination by federal and state tax jurisdictions under the respective statutes of limitations.

New Accounting Pronouncements

On June 16, 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-13 to amend the accounting for credit losses for certain financial instruments. Under the new guidance, an entity recognizes its estimate of expected credit losses as an allowance, which the FASB believes will result in more timely recognition of such losses. ASU 2016-13 applies to financial assets measured at amortized cost and certain other instruments, including notes and mortgages receivable and net investments in direct financing leases. This standard does not apply to receivables arising from operating leases, which are within the scope of Topic 842. ASU 2016-13 became effective for us and was adopted on January 1, 2020 and required a modified retrospective approach through a cumulative-effect adjustment to retained earnings. We recorded a credit loss reserve related to our direct financing leases totaling $578,000, which was recognized as a cumulative adjustment to retained earnings and as a reduction of the investment in direct financing leases balance on our consolidated balance sheets on January 1, 2020. In addition, we recorded a credit loss reserve as of January 1, 2020 of $309,000 related to our notes and mortgages receivable balance, which was recognized as a cumulative adjustment to retained earnings.

On March 12, 2020, the FASB issued ASU 2020-04, Reference Rate Reform (Topic 848) (“ASU 2020-04”). ASU 2020-04 contains practical expedients for reference rate reform related activities that impact debt, leases, derivatives and other contracts. The guidance in ASU 2020-04 provides optional expedients and exceptions for applying generally accepted accounting principles to contract modifications and hedging relationships, subject to meeting certain criteria, that reference LIBOR or another reference rate expected to be discontinued.We are currently evaluating the impact the adoption of ASU 2020-04 will have on our consolidated financial statements.

NOTE 2. — LEASES

As of December 31, 2020, we owned 901 properties and leased 58 properties from third-party landlords. These 959 properties are located in 35 states across the United States and Washington, D.C. Substantially all of our properties are leased on a triple-net basis to convenience store retailers, petroleum distributors and other automotive-related and retail tenants. Our tenants either operate their business at our properties directly or sublet our properties and supply fuel to third parties that operate the convenience store and gasoline station businesses. Our triple-net lease tenants are responsible for the payment of all taxes, maintenance, repairs, insurance and other operating expenses relating to our properties, and are also responsible for environmental contamination occurring during the terms of their leases and in certain cases also for environmental contamination that existed before their leases commenced. Our tenants either operate our properties directly or sublet our properties and supply fuel to third parties that operate the convenience stores and gasoline stations businesses. Our triple-net lease tenants are responsible for the payment of all taxes, maintenance, repairs, insurance and other operating expenses relating to our properties, and are also responsible for environmental contamination occurring during the terms of their leases and in certain cases also for environmental contamination that existed before their leases commenced. For additional information regarding environmental obligations, see Note 5 – Environmental Obligations.

Substantially all of our tenants’ financial results depend on convenience store sales, the sale of refined petroleum products, and/or rental income from their subtenants. As a result, our tenants’ financial results are highly dependent on the performance of the petroleum marketing industry, which is highly competitive and subject to volatility. During the terms of our leases, we monitor the credit quality of our triple-net lease tenants by reviewing their published credit rating, if available, reviewing publicly available financial statements, or reviewing financial or other operating statements which are delivered to us pursuant to applicable lease agreements, monitoring news reports regarding our tenants and their respective businesses, and monitoring the timeliness of lease payments and the performance of other financial covenants under their leases.

We adopted ASU 2016-02 as of January 1, 2019. ASU 2016-02 amends the existing accounting standards for lease accounting, including requiring lessees to recognize most leases on their balance sheets. Under ASU 2016-02, lessor accounting will remain similar to lessor accounting under previous GAAP, while aligning with the FASB’s new revenue recognition guidance.

For leases in which we are the lessor, we are (i) retaining classification of our historical leases as we are not required to reassess classification upon adoption of the new standard, (ii) expensing indirect leasing costs in connection with new or extended tenant leases, the recognition of which would have been deferred under prior accounting guidance and (iii) aggregating revenue from our lease components and non-lease components (comprised of tenant reimbursements) into revenue from rental properties.

Revenues from rental properties for the years ended December 31, 2020, 2019 and 2018, were $144,601,000, $137,736,000 and $133,019,000, respectively. Rental income contractually due from our tenants included in revenues from rental properties was $128,246,000, $119,293,000 and $114,105,000 for the years ended December 31, 2020, 2019 and 2018, respectively.

In accordance with GAAP, we recognize rental revenue in amounts which vary from the amount of rent contractually due during the periods presented. As a result, revenues from rental properties include non-cash adjustments recorded for deferred rental revenue due to the recognition of rental income on a straight-line basis over the current lease term, the net amortization of above-market and below-market leases, rental income recorded under direct financing leases using the effective interest method which produces a constant periodic rate of return on the net investments in the leased properties and the amortization of deferred lease incentives (collectively, “Revenue Recognition Adjustments”). Revenue Recognition Adjustments included in revenues from rental properties resulted in a reduction in revenue of $895,000, for the year ended December 31, 2020 and increases in revenue of $960,000 and $2,223,000 for the years ended December, 2019 and 2018, respectively.

Tenant reimbursements, which are included in revenues from rental properties and which consist of real estate taxes and other municipal charges paid by us which were reimbursed by our tenants pursuant to the terms of triple-net lease agreements, were $17,250,000, $17,483,000 and $16,691,000 for the years ended December 31, 2020, 2019 and 2018, respectively.

We incurred $351,000, $373,000 and $579,000 of lease origination costs for the years ended December 31, 2020, 2019 and 2018, respectively. This deferred expense is recognized on a straight-line basis as amortization expense in our consolidated statements of operations over the terms of the various leases.

The components of the $77,238,000 investment in direct financing leases as of December 31, 2020, are lease payments receivable of $113,256,000 plus unguaranteed estimated residual value of $13,928,000 less unearned income of $49,028,000 and $918,000 allowance for credit losses. The components of the $82,366,000 investment in direct financing leases as of December 31, 2019, are lease payments receivable of $126,412,000 plus unguaranteed estimated residual value of $13,928,000 less unearned income of $57,974,000.

In accordance with ASU 2016-13, we applied changes in loss reserves related to these direct financing leases totaling $578,000, as a cumulative adjustment to retained earnings and as a reduction of the investment in direct financing leases balance on our consolidated balance sheets on January 1, 2020. During the year ended December 31, 2020, we recorded an additional allowance for credit losses of $340,000 on our net investments in direct financing leases due to changes in expected economic conditions, which was included within other income in our consolidated statements of operations.

Future contractual annual rentals receivable from our tenants, which have terms in excess of one year as of December 31, 2020, are as follows (in thousands):

Operating Leases Direct Financing Leases

For leases in which we are the lessee, ASU 2016-02 requires leases with durations greater than twelve months to be recognized on our consolidated balance sheets. We elected the package of transition provisions available for expired or existing contracts, which allowed us to carryforward our historical assessments of (i) whether contracts are or contain leases, (ii) lease classification and (iii) initial direct costs.

As of January 1, 2019, we recognized operating lease right-of-use assets of $25,561,000 (net of deferred rent expense) and operating lease liabilities of $26,087,000, which were presented on our consolidated financial statements. The right-of-use assets and lease liabilities are carried at the present value of the remaining expected future lease payments. When available, we use the rate implicit in the lease to discount lease payments to present value; however, our current leases did not provide a readily determinable implicit rate. Therefore, we estimated our incremental borrowing rate to discount the lease payments based on information available and considered factors such as interest rates available to us on a fully collateralized basis and terms of the leases. ASU 2016-02 did not have a material impact on our consolidated balance sheets or on our consolidated statements of operations. The most significant impact was the recognition of right-of-use assets and lease liabilities for operating leases, while our accounting for finance leases remained substantially unchanged.

The following presents the lease-related assets and liabilities (in thousands):

Assets

Right-of-use assets - operating $ 24,319

Right-of-use assets - finance 763

Total lease assets $ 25,082

Liabilities

Lease liability - operating $ 25,045

Lease liability - finance 3,541

Total lease liabilities $ 28,586

The following presents the weighted average lease terms and discount rates of our leases:

Weighted-average remaining lease term (years)

Operating leases 9.2

Finance leases 10.6

Weighted-average discount rate

Operating leases (a) 4.80 %

Finance leases 17.30 %

The following presents our total lease costs (in thousands):

Operating lease cost $ 3,999

Finance lease cost

Amortization of leased assets 650

Interest on lease liabilities 719

Short-term lease cost 82

Total lease cost $ 5,450

The following presents supplemental cash flow information related to our leases (in thousands):

Cash paid for amounts included in the measurement of lease liabilities

Operating cash flows for operating leases $ 3,798

Operating cash flows for finance leases 719

Financing cash flows for finance leases $ 650

As of December 31, 2020, scheduled lease liabilities mature as follows (in thousands):

Operating Leases Direct Financing Leases

Less: amount representing interest (6,453 ) (2,487 )

Present value of lease payments $ 25,045 $ 3,541

We have obligations to lessors under non-cancelable operating leases which have terms in excess of one year, principally for convenience store and gasoline station properties. The leased properties have a remaining lease term averaging approximately eight years, including renewal options. Future minimum annual rentals payable under such leases, excluding renewal options, are as follows: 2021 – $4,646,000, 2022 – $3,374,000, 2023 – $2,675,000, 2024 – $2,021,000, 2025 – $1,037,000 and $1,817,000 thereafter.

Rent expense, substantially all of which consists of minimum rentals on non-cancelable operating leases, amounted to $3,769,000, $4,664,000 and $4,660,000 for the years ended December 31, 2020, 2019 and 2018, respectively, and is included in property costs. Rent received under subleases for the years ended December 31, 2020, 2019 and 2018, was $7,892,000, $8,699,000 and $9,023,000, respectively, and is included in rental revenue discussed above.

Major Tenants

As of December 31, 2020, we had four significant tenants by revenue:

Getty Petroleum Marketing Inc.

Getty Petroleum Marketing Inc. (“Marketing”) was our largest tenant from 1997 until 2012 under a unitary triple-net master lease that was terminated in April 2012, as a consequence of Marketing’s bankruptcy, at which time we either sold or released these properties. As of December 31, 2020, 355 of the properties we own or lease were previously leased to Marketing, of which 317 properties are subject to long-term triple-net leases with petroleum distributors in 14 separate property portfolios and 29 properties are leased as single unit triple-net leases. The leases covering properties previously leased to Marketing are unitary triple-net lease agreements generally with an initial term of 15 years and options for successive renewal terms of up to 20 years. Rent is scheduled to increase at varying intervals during both the initial and renewal terms of the leases. Several of the leases provide for additional rent based on the aggregate volume of fuel sold. In addition, the majority of the leases require the tenants to invest capital in our properties, substantially all of which are related to the replacement of USTs that are owned by our tenants. As of December 31, 2020, we have a remaining commitment to fund up to $6,829,000 in the aggregate with our tenants for our portion of such capital improvements. Our commitment provides us with the option to either reimburse our tenants or to offset rent when these capital expenditures are made.

This deferred expense is recognized on a straight-line basis as a reduction of rental revenue in our consolidated statements of operations over the life of the various leases.

As part of the triple-net leases for properties previously leased to Marketing, we transferred title of the USTs to our tenants, and the obligation to pay for the retirement and decommissioning or removal of USTs at the end of their useful lives, or earlier if circumstances warranted, was fully or partially transferred to our new tenants. We remain contingently liable for this obligation in the event that our tenants do not satisfy their responsibilities. Accordingly, through December 31, 2020, we removed $13,813,000 of asset retirement obligations and $10,808,000 of net asset retirement costs related to USTs from our balance sheet. The cumulative change of $1,317,000 (net of accumulated amortization of $1,688,000) is recorded as deferred rental revenue and will be recognized on a straight-line basis as additional revenues from rental properties over the terms of the various leases.

NOTE 3. — COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES

Credit Risk

Legal Proceedings

We are involved in various legal proceedings and claims which arise in the ordinary course of our business. As of December 31, 2020 and 2019, we had accrued $4,275,000 and $17,820,000, respectively, for certain of these matters which we believe were appropriate based on information then currently available. We recorded provisions aggregating $85,000 and $5,896,000, for the year ended December 31, 2020, and 2019, respectively, for environmental litigation accruals for certain of these matters. We are unable to estimate ranges in excess of the amount accrued with any certainty for these matters. It is possible that our assumptions regarding the ultimate allocation method and share of responsibility that we used to allocate environmental liabilities may change, which may result in our providing an accrual, or adjustments to the amounts recorded, for environmental litigation accruals. Matters related to our former Newark, New Jersey Terminal and the Lower Passaic River, our methyl tertiary butyl ether (a fuel derived from methanol, commonly referred to as “MTBE”) litigations in the states of New Jersey, Pennsylvania and Maryland, and our lawsuit with the State of New York pertaining to a property formerly owned by us in Uniondale, New York, in particular, could cause a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations, liquidity, ability to pay dividends or stock price. During the years ended December 31, 2020 and 2019, we received $21,300,000 and $2,707,000, respectively, for former legal litigation settlements.

Matters related to our former Newark, New Jersey Terminal and the Lower Passaic River.

In 2004, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) issued General Notice Letters (“GNL”) to over 100 entities, including us, alleging that they are PRPs at the Diamond Alkali Superfund Site (“Superfund Site”), which includes the former Diamond Shamrock Corporation manufacturing facility located at 80-120 Lister Ave. in Newark, New Jersey and a 17-mile stretch of the Passaic River from Dundee Dam to the Newark Bay and its tributaries (the Lower Passaic River Study Area or “LPRSA”). In May 2007, over 70 GNL recipients, including us, entered into an Administrative Settlement Agreement and Order on Consent (“AOC”) with the EPA to perform a Remedial Investigation and Feasibility Study (“RI/FS”) for the LPRSA, which is intended to address the investigation and evaluation of alternative remedial actions with respect to alleged damages to the LPRSA. Many of the parties to the AOC, including us, are also members of a Cooperating Parties Group (“CPG”). The CPG agreed to an interim allocation formula for purposes of allocating the costs to complete the RI/FS among its members, with the understanding that this interim allocation formula is not binding on the parties in terms of any potential liability for the costs to remediate the LPRSA. The CPG submitted to the EPA its draft RI/FS in 2015, which sets forth various alternatives for remediating the entire 17 miles of the LPRSA. In October 2018, the EPA issued a letter directing the CPG to prepare a streamlined feasibility study for just the upper 9-miles of the LPRSA based on an iterative approach using adaptive management strategies. On December 4, 2020, The CPG submitted a Final Draft Interim Remedy Feasibility Study (“IR/FS”) to the EPA which identifies various targeted dredge and cap alternatives for the upper 9-miles of the LPRSA. On December 11, 2020, EPA conditionally approved the CPG’s IR/FS for the upper 9-miles of the LPRSA, which recognizes that interim actions and adaptive management may be appropriate before deciding a final remedy. It is anticipated that EPA will issue a proposed plan for an interim remedy for the upper 9-miles, which will be published for public comment. Subject to EPA’s response to any comments and/or objections received, it is anticipated that EPA will issue a Record of Decision (“ROD”) for an interim remedy for the upper 9-mile portion of the LPRSA in 2021 (“Upper 9-mile IR ROD”).

In addition to the RI/FS activities, other actions relating to the investigation and/or remediation of the LPRSA have proceeded as follows. First, in June 2012, certain members of the CPG entered into an Administrative Settlement Agreement and Order on Consent (“10.9 AOC”) with the EPA to perform certain remediation activities, including removal and capping of sediments at the river mile 10.9 area and certain testing. The EPA also issued a Unilateral Order to Occidental Chemical Corporation (“Occidental”),

the former owner/operator of the Diamond Shamrock Corporation facility responsible for the discharge of 2,3,8,8-TCDD (“dioxin”) and other hazardous substances from the Lister facility. The Order directed Occidental to participate and contribute to the cost of the river mile 10.9 work. Concurrent with the CPG’s work on the RI/FS, on April 11, 2014, the EPA issued a draft Focused Feasibility Study (“FFS”) with proposed remedial alternatives to remediate the lower 8-miles of the LPRSA. The FFS was subject to public comments and objections and, on March 4, 2016, the EPA issued a ROD for the lower 8-miles (“Lower 8-mile ROD”) selecting a remedy that involves bank-to-bank dredging and installing an engineered cap with an estimated cost of $1,380,000,000. On March 31, 2016, we and more than 100 other PRPs received from the EPA a “Notice of Potential Liability and Commencement of Negotiations for Remedial Design” (“Notice”), which informed the recipients that the EPA intends to seek an Administrative Order on Consent and Settlement Agreement with Occidental (who the EPA considers the primary contributor of dioxin and other pesticides generated from the production of Agent Orange at its Diamond Shamrock Corporation facility and a discharger of other contaminants of concern (“COCs”) to the Superfund Site for remedial design of the remedy selected in the Lower 8-mile ROD, after which the EPA plans to begin negotiations with “major” PRPs for implementation and/or payment of the selected remedy. The Notice also stated that the EPA believes that some of the PRPs and other parties not yet identified will be eligible for a cash out settlement with the EPA. On September 30, 2016, Occidental entered into an agreement with the EPA to perform the remedial design for the Lower 8-mile ROD. In December 2019, Occidental submitted a report to the EPA on the progress of the remedial design work, which is still ongoing.

Occidental has asserted that it is entitled to indemnification by Maxus Energy Corporation (“Maxus”) and Tierra Solutions, Inc. (“Tierra”) for its liability in connection with the Site. Occidental has also asserted that Maxus and Tierra’s parent company, YPF, S.A. (“YPF”) and certain of its affiliates must indemnify Occidental. On June 16, 2016, Maxus and Tierra filed for reorganization under Chapter 11 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code. In July 2017, an amended Chapter 11 plan of liquidation became effective and, in connection therewith, Maxus and Tierra entered into a mutual contribution release agreement with certain parties, including us, pertaining to certain past costs, but not future remedy costs.

By letter dated March 30, 2017, the EPA advised the recipients of the Notice that it would be entering into cash out settlements with 20 PRPs to resolve their alleged liability for the remedial actions addressed in the Lower 8-mile ROD, who the EPA stated did not discharge any of the eight hazardous substances identified as a COC in the ROD. The letter also stated that other parties who did not discharge dioxins, furans or polychlorinated biphenyls (which are considered the COCs posing the greatest risk to the river) may also be eligible for cash out settlements, and that the EPA would begin a process for identifying other PRPs for negotiation of similar cash out settlements. We were not included in the initial group of 20 parties identified by the EPA for cash out settlements, but we believe we meet EPA’s criteria for a cash out settlement and should be considered for same in any future discussions. In January 2018, the EPA published a notice of its intent to enter into a final settlement agreement with 15 of the initial group of parties to resolve their respective alleged liability for the Lower 8-mile ROD work, each for a payment to the EPA in the amount of $280,600. In August 2017, the EPA appointed an independent third-party allocation expert to conduct allocation proceedings with most of the remaining recipients of the Notice, which is anticipated to lead to additional offers of cash out settlements to certain additional parties and/or a consent decree in which parties that are not offered a cash out settlement will agree to perform the Lower 8-mile ROD remedial action. The allocation proceedings, which we are participating in, are still ongoing.

On June 30, 2018, Occidental filed a complaint in the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey seeking cost recovery and contribution under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act for its alleged expenses with respect to the investigation, design, and anticipated implementation of the remedy for the Lower 8-mile ROD work. The complaint lists over 120 defendants, including us, many of whom were also named in the EPA’s 2016 Notice. Factual discovery is ongoing, and we are defending the claims consistent with our defenses in the related proceedings.

Many uncertainties remain regarding the anticipated interim remedy selection for the Upper 9-mile IR ROD and how the EPA intends to implement either the Upper 9-mile IR ROD and/or the Lower 8-mile ROD work, including whether EPA will designate certain PRPs as work parties and/or if EPA will identify PRPs for future cash-out settlement negotiations for the Upper 9-mile IR ROD, the Lower 8-mile ROD work or both. Further, none of the above referenced AOCs and RODs relating to the LPRSA obligate us to fund or perform any remedial action contemplated for the LPRSA and do not resolve liability issues for remedial work or the restoration of or compensation for alleged natural resource damages to the LPRSA, which are not known at this time. Therefore, we anticipate that performance of the EPA’s selected remedies for the LPRSA will be subject to future negotiation, potential enforcement proceedings and/or possible litigation.

Based on currently known facts and circumstances, including, among other factors, anticipated allocations, our belief that there was not any use or discharge of dioxins, furans or polychlorinated biphenyls in connection with our former petroleum storage operations at our former Newark, New Jersey Terminal, and because there are numerous other parties who will likely bear the costs of remediation and/or damages, the Company does not believe that resolution of this matter as relates to the Company is reasonably likely to have a material impact on our results of operations. Nevertheless, our ultimate liability in the pending and possible future proceedings pertaining to the LPRSA remains uncertain and subject to numerous contingencies which cannot be predicted and the outcome of which are not yet known. Therefore, it is possible that our ultimate liability resulting from this matter and the impact on our results of operations could be material.

MTBE Litigation – State of New Jersey

We were a party to a case involving a large number of gasoline station sites throughout the State of New Jersey brought by various governmental agencies of the State of New Jersey, including the NJDEP. This New Jersey case (the “New Jersey MDL Proceedings”) is among the many cases that were transferred from various courts throughout the country and consolidated in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York for coordinated Multi-District Litigation (“MDL”) proceedings. The New Jersey MDL Proceedings allege various theories of liability due to contamination of groundwater with MTBE as the basis for claims seeking compensatory and punitive damages. The State of New Jersey is seeking reimbursement of significant clean-up and remediation costs arising out of the alleged release of MTBE containing gasoline in the State of New Jersey and is asserting various natural resource damage claims as well as liability against owners and operators of gasoline station properties from which the releases occurred. The New Jersey MDL Proceedings named us as a defendant along with approximately 50 petroleum refiners, manufacturers, distributors and retailers of MTBE, or gasoline containing MTBE. The majority of the named defendants have settled their case with the State of New Jersey.

In 2020, we settled the New Jersey MDL Proceedings in accordance with the terms of a Judicial Consent Order (“JCO”), which included payment by us of $13,500,000 in exchange for satisfaction and release of claims made against us by various parties including the NJDEP. Our settlement payment was within our previously established litigation loss reserve for the case.The JCO was approved and entered by the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York on December 17, 2020 and, in accordance with the terms thereof, payment was made by the Company and the case against the Company dismissed.

MTBE Litigation – State of Pennsylvania

On July 7, 2014, our subsidiary, Getty Properties Corp., was served with a complaint filed by the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania (the “State”) in the Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County relating to alleged statewide MTBE contamination in Pennsylvania. The named plaintiffs are the State, by and through (then) Pennsylvania Attorney General Kathleen G. Kane (as Trustee of the waters of the State), the Pennsylvania Insurance Department (which governs and administers the Underground Storage Tank Indemnification Fund), the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (vested with the authority to protect the environment) and the Pennsylvania Underground Storage Tank Indemnification Fund. The complaint names us and more than 50 other petroleum refiners, manufacturers, distributors and retailers of MTBE or gasoline containing MTBE who are alleged to have distributed, stored and sold MTBE gasoline in Pennsylvania. The complaint seeks compensation for natural resource damages and for injuries sustained as a result of “defendants’ unfair and deceptive trade practices and act in the marketing of MTBE and gasoline containing MTBE.” The plaintiffs also seek to recover costs paid or incurred by the State to detect, treat and remediate MTBE from public and private water wells and groundwater. The plaintiffs assert causes of action against all defendants based on multiple theories, including strict liability – defective design; strict liability – failure to warn; public nuisance; negligence; trespass; and violation of consumer protection law.

The case was filed in the Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County, but was removed by defendants to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania and then transferred to the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York so that it may be managed as part of the ongoing MTBE MDL proceedings. In November 2015, plaintiffs filed a second amended complaint naming additional defendants and adding factual allegations against the defendants. We have joined with other defendants in the filing of a motion to dismiss the claims against us. This motion is pending with the Court. We intend to defend vigorously the claims made against us. Our ultimate liability in this proceeding is uncertain and subject to numerous contingencies which cannot be predicted and the outcome of which are not yet known.

MTBE Litigation – State of Maryland

On December 17, 2017, the State of Maryland, by and through the Attorney General on behalf of the Maryland Department of Environment and the Maryland Department of Health (the “State of Maryland”), filed a complaint in the Circuit Court for Baltimore City related to alleged statewide MTBE contamination in Maryland. The complaint was served upon us on January 19, 2018. The complaint names us and more than 60 other defendants. The complaint seeks compensation for natural resource damages and for injuries sustained as a result of the defendants’ unfair and deceptive trade practices in the marketing of MTBE and gasoline containing MTBE. The plaintiffs also seek to recover costs paid or incurred by the State of Maryland to detect, investigate, treat and remediate MTBE from public and private water wells and groundwater, punitive damages and the award of attorneys’ fees and litigation costs. The plaintiffs assert causes of action against all defendants based on multiple theories, including strict liability – defective design; strict liability – failure to warn; strict liability for abnormally dangerous activity; public nuisance; negligence; trespass; and violations of Titles 4, 7 and 9 of the Maryland Environmental Code.

On February 14, 2018, defendants removed the case to the United States District Court for the District of Maryland. We intend to defend vigorously the claims made against us. Our ultimate liability, if any, in this proceeding is uncertain and subject to numerous contingencies which cannot be predicted and the outcome of which are not yet known.

Uniondale, New York Litigation

In September 2004, the State of New York commenced an action against us, United Gas Corp., Costa Gas Station, Inc., Vincent Costa, Sharon Irni, The Ingraham Bedell Corporation, Richard Berger and Exxon Mobil in New York Supreme Court in Albany County seeking recovery for reimbursement of investigation and remediation costs claimed to have been incurred by the New York Environmental Protection and Spill Compensation Fund relating to contamination it alleges emanated from various gasoline station properties located in the same vicinity in Uniondale, New York, including a site formerly owned by us and at which a petroleum release and cleanup occurred. The complaint also seeks future costs for remediation, as well as interest and penalties. We served an answer to the complaint denying responsibility. In 2007, the State of New York commenced action against Shell, Motiva, and related parties, in the New York Supreme Court, Albany County seeking basically the same relief sought in the action involving us. We also filed a third-party complaint against Hess, Sprague Operating Resources LLC (successor to RAD Energy Corp.), Service Station Installation of NY, Inc., and certain individual defendants based on alleged contribution to the contamination that is the subject of the State’s claims arising from a petroleum discharge at a gasoline station up-gradient from the site formerly owned by us. In 2016, the various actions filed by the State of New York and our third-party actions were consolidated for discovery proceedings and trial. Discovery in this case is in later stages and, as it nears completion, a schedule for trial will be established. We are unable to estimate the possible loss or range of loss in excess of the amount we have accrued for this lawsuit. It is possible that losses related to this case could exceed the amounts accrued, as of December 31, 2020.

Lukoil Americas Case

In March 2016, we filed a civil lawsuit in the New York State Supreme Court, New York County, against Lukoil Americas Corporation and certain of its current or former executives, seeking recovery of environmental remediation costs that we either have incurred, or expect to incur, at properties previously leased to Marketing pursuant to a master lease. The lawsuit alleged various theories of liability, including claims based on environmental liability statutes in effect in the states in which the properties are located, as well as a breach of contract claim seeking to pierce Marketing’s corporate veil. We settled this case effective December 17, 2020 pursuant to the terms of a Settlement Agreement and General Release which among other things included a payment to the Companyof $20,500,000 (net of contingency fees paid to the law firm representing the Company in this litigation). The case has been dismissed.

NOTE 4. — DEBT

The amounts outstanding under our Restated Credit Agreement and our senior unsecured notes are as follows (in thousands):

Maturity Date Interest Rate December 31, 2020 December 31, 2019

Unamortized debt issuance costs, net (a) (2,307 ) (2,949 )

Credit Agreement

On June 2, 2015, we entered into a $225,000,000 senior unsecured credit agreement (the “Credit Agreement”) with a group of banks led by Bank of America, N.A. The Credit Agreement consisted of a $175,000,000 unsecured revolving credit facility (the “Revolving Facility”) and a $50,000,000 unsecured term loan (the “Term Loan”).

On March 23, 2018, we entered into an amended and restated credit agreement (as amended, the “Restated Credit Agreement”) amending and restating our Credit Agreement. Pursuant to the Restated Credit Agreement, we (a) increased the borrowing capacity under the Revolving Facility from $175,000,000 to $250,000,000, (b) extended the maturity date of the Revolving Facility from June 2018 to March 2022, (c) extended the maturity date of the Term Loan from June 2020 to March 2023 and (d) amended certain financial covenants and provisions.

Subject to the terms of the Restated Credit Agreement and our continued compliance with its provisions, we have the option to (a) extend the term of the Revolving Facility for one additional year to March 2023 and (b) request that the lenders approve an increase of up to $300,000,000 in the amount of the Revolving Facility and/or the Term Loan to $600,000,000 in the aggregate.

The Restated Credit Agreement incurs interest and fees at various rates based on our total indebtedness to total asset value ratio at the end of each quarterly reporting period. The Revolving Facility permits borrowings at an interest rate equal to the sum of a base rate plus a margin of 0.50% to 1.30% or a LIBOR rate plus a margin of 1.50% to 2.30%. The annual commitment fee on the undrawn funds under the Revolving Facility is 0.15% to 0.25%. The Term Loan prior to its repayment pursuant to a subsequent amendment to the Restated Credit Agreement bore interest at a rate equal to the sum of a base rate plus a margin of 0.45% to 1.25% or a LIBOR rate plus a margin of 1.45% to 2.25%.

On September 12, 2019, in connection with prepayment of the Term Loan, we entered into a consent and amendment (the “Second Amendment”) of our Restated Credit Agreement. The Second Amendment modifies the Restated Credit Agreement to, among other things, (a) increase our borrowing capacity under the Revolving Facility from $250,000,000 to $300,000,000 and (b) decrease lender commitments under the Term Loan to $0.

On December 14, 2020, we used a portion of the net proceeds from the Series I Notes, Series J Notes and Series K Notes (each as described below) to repay $75,000,000 of borrowings outstanding under our Restated Credit Agreement.

Senior Unsecured Notes

On December 4, 2020, we entered into a fifth amended and restated note purchase and guarantee agreement (the “Fifth Amended and Restated Prudential Agreement”) with Prudential and certain of its affiliates amending and restating our existing fourth amended and restated note purchase agreement. Pursuant to the Fifth Amended and Restated Prudential Agreement, we agreed that our (a) 6.0% Series A Guaranteed Senior Notes due February 25, 2021, in the original aggregate principal amount of $100,000,000 (the “Series A Notes”), (b) 5.35% Series B Guaranteed Senior Notes due June 2, 2023, in the original aggregate principal amount of $75,000,000 (the “Series B Notes”), (c) 4.75% Series C Guaranteed Senior Notes due February 25, 2025, in the aggregate principal amount of $50,000,000 (the “Series C Notes”) and (d) 5.47% Series D Guaranteed Senior Notes due June 21, 2028, in the aggregate principal amount of $50,000,000 (the “Series D Notes”) and (e) 3.52% Series F Guaranteed Senior Notes due September 12, 2029, in the aggregate principal amount of $50,000,000 (the “Series F Notes”) that were outstanding under the existing fourth restated prudential note purchase agreement would continue to remain outstanding under the Fifth Amended and Restated Prudential Agreement and we authorized and issued our 3.43% Series I Guaranteed Senior Notes due November 25, 2030, in the aggregate principal amount of $100,000,000 (the “Series I Notes” and, together with the Series A Notes, Series B Notes, Series C Notes, Series D Notes and Series F Notes, the “Notes”). On December 4, 2020, we completed the early redemption of our 6.0% Series A Notes due February 25, 2021, in the original aggregate principal amount of $100,000,000. As a result of the early redemption, we recognized a $1,233,000 loss on extinguishment of debt on our consolidated statement of operations for the year ended December 31, 2020. The Fifth Amended and Restated Prudential Agreement does not provide for scheduled reductions in the principal balance of the Series I Notes, or any of our previously issued Series B Notes, Series C Notes, Series D Notes, or Series F Notes prior to their respective maturities.

On June 21, 2018, we entered into a note purchase and guarantee agreement (the “MetLife Note Purchase Agreement”) with MetLife and certain of its affiliates. Pursuant to the MetLife Note Purchase Agreement, we authorized and issued our 5.47% Series E Guaranteed Senior Notes due June 21, 2028, in the aggregate principal amount of $50,000,000 (the “Series E Notes”). The MetLife Note Purchase Agreement does not provide for scheduled reductions in the principal balance of the Series E Notes prior to their maturity.

guarantee agreement. Pursuant to the First Amended and Restated AIG Agreement, we agreed that our 3.52% Series G Guaranteed Senior Notes due September 12, 2029, in the aggregate principal amount of $50,000,000 (the “Series G Notes”) that were outstanding under the existing note purchase and guarantee agreement would continue to remain outstanding under the First Amended and Restated AIG Agreement and we authorized and issued our $50,000,000 of 3.43% Series J Guaranteed Senior Notes due November 25, 2030 (the “Series J Notes”) to AIG. The First Amended and Restated AIG Agreement does not provide for scheduled reductions in the principal balance of the Series J Notes or any of our previously issued Series G Notes prior to their respective maturities.

Covenants

The Restated Credit Agreement and our senior unsecured notes contain customary financial covenants such as leverage, coverage ratios and minimum tangible net worth, as well as limitations on restricted payments, which may limit our ability to incur additional debt or pay dividends. The Restated Credit Agreement and our senior unsecured notes also contain customary events of default, including cross defaults to each other, change of control and failure to maintain REIT status (provided that the senior unsecured notes require a mandatory offer to prepay the notes upon a change in control in lieu of a change of control event of default). Any event of default, if not cured or waived in a timely manner, would increase by 200 basis points (2.00%) the interest rate we pay under the Restated Credit Agreement and our senior unsecured notes, and could result in the acceleration of our indebtedness under the Restated Credit Agreement and our senior unsecured notes. We may be prohibited from drawing funds under the Revolving Facility if there is any event or condition that constitutes an event of default under the Restated Credit Agreement or that, with the giving of any notice, the passage of time, or both, would be an event of default under the Restated Credit Agreement.

As of December 31, 2020, we are in compliance with all of the material terms of the Restated Credit Agreement and our senior unsecured notes, including the various financial covenants described herein.

Debt Maturities

As of December 31, 2020, scheduled debt maturities, including balloon payments, are as follows (in thousands):

Revolving Facility Senior Unsecured Notes Total

NOTE 5. — ENVIRONMENTAL OBLIGATIONS

obligations in the event that our tenant does not satisfy them, and we are required to accrue for environmental liabilities that we believe are allocable to others under our leases if we determine that it is probable that our tenant will not meet its environmental obligations. It is possible that our assumptions regarding the ultimate allocation method and share of responsibility that we used to allocate environmental liabilities may change, which may result in material adjustments to the amounts recorded for environmental litigation accruals and environmental remediation liabilities. We assess whether to accrue for environmental liabilities based upon relevant factors including our tenants’ histories of paying for such obligations, our assessment of their financial capability, and their intent to pay for such obligations. However, there can be no assurance that our assessments are correct or that our tenants who have paid their obligations in the past will continue to do so.We may ultimately be responsible to pay for environmental liabilities as the property owner if our tenant fails to pay them.

The estimated future costs for known environmental remediation requirements are accrued when it is probable that a liability has been incurred and a reasonable estimate of fair value can be made. The accrued liability is the aggregate of our estimate of the fair value of cost for each component of the liability, net of estimated recoveries from state UST remediation funds considering estimated recovery rates developed from prior experience with the funds.

GTY US Equity

GTY · 10-K · period ended 2020-12-31

Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations

Item 7A. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk

Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data

GTY US Equity☆

GTY · 10-K · period ended 2020-12-31

Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations

Item 7A. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk

Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data

GTY US Equity