ARMOUR Residential REIT (ARR) Risk Factors

As described above, we conduct our operations so as not to become required to register as an investment company under the 1940 Act based on current laws, regulations and guidance. Although we monitor our portfolio, we may not be able to maintain this exclusion under the 1940 Act. If we were to fail to qualify for this exclusion in the future, we could be required to restructure our activities or the activities of our subsidiaries, if any, including effecting sales of assets in a manner that, or at a time when we would not otherwise choose, which could negatively affect the value of our stock, the sustainability of our business model and our ability to make distributions. The sale could occur during adverse market conditions and we could be forced to accept a price below that which we believe is appropriate. There can be no assurance that the laws and regulations governing the 1940 Act status of REITs, including guidance and interpretations from the SEC and its staff regarding the Section 3(c)(5)(C) exclusion, will not change in a manner that adversely affects our operations or business. The SEC or its staff may issue new interpretations of the Section 3(c)(5)(C) exclusion causing us to change the way we conduct our business, including changes that may adversely affect our ability to achieve our investment objective. We may be required at times to adopt less efficient methods of financing certain of our mortgage related investments and we may be precluded from acquiring certain types of higher yielding securities. The net effect of these factors would be to lower our net interest income. If we fail to qualify for an exclusion from registration as an investment company or an exclusion from the definition of an investment company, our ability to use leverage would be substantially reduced. Our business will be materially and adversely affected if we fail to qualify for an exclusion from regulation under the 1940 Act.

There can be no assurance that the laws and regulations governing the 1940 Act status of REITs, including guidance and interpretations from the SEC staff regarding the Section 3(c)(5)(C) exclusion, will not change in a manner that adversely affects our operations or business. For example, such changes might require us to employ less leverage in financing certain of our mortgage related investments and we may be precluded from acquiring certain types of higher yielding securities. The net effect of these factors would be to lower our net interest income. If we fail to qualify for an exclusion from registration as an investment company or an exclusion from the definition of an investment company, our ability to use leverage would be substantially reduced. Our business will be materially and adversely affected if we fail to qualify for an exclusion from regulation under the 1940 Act. We conduct our business so as not to become regulated as an investment company under the 1940 Act. If we were to fall within the definition of investment company, we would be unable to conduct our business as described in this Annual Report on Form 10-K. Section 3(a)(1)(A) of the 1940 Act defines an investment company as any issuer that is or holds itself out as being engaged primarily in the business of investing, reinvesting or trading in securities. Section 3(a)(1)(C) of the 1940 Act also defines an investment company as any issuer that is engaged or proposes to engage in the business of investing, reinvesting, owning, holding or trading in securities and owns or proposes to acquire investment securities having a value exceeding 40% of the value of the issuer's total assets (exclusive of U.S. Government securities and cash items) on an unconsolidated basis. Excluded from the term "investment securities," among other things, in Section 3(a)(1)(C) of the 1940 Act, as defined above, are U.S. Government securities and securities issued by majority-owned subsidiaries that are not themselves investment companies and are not relying on the exclusion from the definition of investment company set forth in Section 3(c)(1) or Section 3(c)(7) of the 1940 Act. We rely on the exclusion from the definition of "investment company" provided by Section 3(c)(5)(C) of the 1940 Act. To qualify for the exclusion, we make investments so that at least 55% of the assets we own consist of "qualifying assets" and so that at least 80% of the assets we own consist of qualifying assets and other real estate related assets. We generally expect that our investments in our target assets will be treated as either qualifying assets or real estate related assets under Section 3(c)(5)(C) of the 1940 Act in a manner consistent with SEC staff no-action letters. Qualifying assets for this purpose include mortgage loans and other assets, such as whole pool Agency Securities that are considered the functional equivalent of mortgage loans for purposes of the 1940 Act. The SEC staff has not issued guidance with respect to whole pool Credit Risk and Non-Agency Securities. Accordingly, based on our own judgment and analysis of the SEC's pronouncements with respect to agency whole pool certificates, we may also treat Credit Risk and Non-Agency Securities issued with respect to an underlying pool of mortgage loans in which we hold all the certificates issued by the pool as qualifying assets. We invest at least 55% of our assets in whole pool Agency Securities and Credit Risk and Non-Agency Securities that constitute qualifying assets in accordance with SEC staff guidance and at least 80% of our assets in qualifying assets plus other real estate related assets. Other real estate related assets would consist primarily of Agency Securities and Credit Risk and Non-Agency Securities that are not whole pools, such as CMOs and CMBS. As a result of the foregoing restrictions, we are limited in our ability to make or dispose of certain investments. To the extent that the SEC staff publishes new or different guidance with respect to these matters, we may be required to adjust our strategy accordingly. These restrictions could also result in our holding assets we might wish to sell or selling assets we might wish to hold. Although we monitor our portfolio for compliance with the Section 3(c)(5)(C) exclusion periodically and prior to each acquisition and disposition, there can be no assurance that we will be able to maintain this exclusion. To the extent that we elect in the future to conduct our operations through majority-owned subsidiaries, such business will be conducted in such a manner as to ensure that we do not meet the definition of investment company under either Section 3(a)(1)(A) or Section 3(a)(1)(C) of the 1940 Act, because less than 40% of the value of our total assets on an unconsolidated basis would consist of investment securities. We intend to monitor our portfolio periodically to ensure compliance with the 40% test. In such case, we would be a holding company which conducts business exclusively through majority-owned subsidiaries and we would be engaged in the non-investment company business of our subsidiaries.

To qualify as a REIT, we must comply with requirements regarding the composition of our assets and our sources of income. If we are compelled to liquidate our investments to repay obligations to our lenders, we may be unable to comply with these requirements, ultimately jeopardizing our qualification as a REIT, or we may be subject to a 100% tax on any resultant gain if we sell assets that are treated as dealer property or inventory.

To qualify as a REIT, we must ensure that at the end of each calendar quarter, at least 75% of our gross income each year is derived from certain real estate related sources, at least 75% of the value of our assets consists of cash, cash items, government securities and qualified REIT real estate assets, including certain mortgage loans and certain kinds of MBS. The remainder of our investment in securities (other than government securities, TRSs and qualified real estate assets) generally cannot include more than 10% of the outstanding voting securities of any one issuer or more than 10% of the total value of the outstanding securities of any one issuer. In addition, in general, no more than 5% of the value of our assets (other than government securities, TRSs and qualified real estate assets) can consist of the securities of any one issuer, and no more than 20% of the value of our total securities can be represented by securities of one or more TRSs. If we fail to comply with these requirements at the end of any calendar quarter, we must correct the failure within 30 days after the end of the calendar quarter or qualify for certain statutory relief provisions to avoid losing our REIT qualification and suffering adverse tax consequences. As a result, we may be required to liquidate from our investment portfolio otherwise attractive investments. For example, in certain cases, the modification of a debt instrument or, potentially, an increase in the value of a debt instrument that we acquired at a significant discount, could result in the conversion of the instrument from a qualifying real estate asset to a wholly or partially non-qualifying asset that must be liquidated in order for us to qualify or maintain our qualification as a REIT. These actions could have the effect of reducing our income and amounts available for distribution to our stockholders.

Qualification as a REIT involves the satisfaction of numerous requirements (some on an annual or quarterly basis) established under highly technical and complex provisions of the Code for which only a limited number of judicial or administrative interpretations exist. We believe we currently satisfy all the requirements of a REIT. However, the determination that we satisfy all REIT requirements requires an analysis of various factual matters and circumstances that may not be totally within our control. We have not requested and do not intend to request a ruling from the IRS that we qualify as a REIT. Accordingly, we are not certain we will be able to qualify and remain qualified as a REIT for federal income tax purposes. Even a technical or inadvertent mistake could jeopardize our REIT status. Furthermore, the U.S. Congress or the IRS might change tax laws or regulations and the courts might issue new rulings, in each case potentially having retroactive effect, which could make it more difficult or impossible for us to qualify as a REIT. If we fail to qualify as a REIT in any tax year, then: - we would be taxed as a regular domestic corporation, which, among other things, means that we would be unable to deduct distributions to stockholders in computing taxable income and would be subject to federal income tax on our net income at regular corporate rates;- any resulting tax liability could be substantial and would reduce the amount of cash available for distribution to stockholders and could force us to liquidate assets at inopportune times, causing lower income or higher losses than would result if these assets were not liquidated; and - unless we were entitled to relief under applicable statutory provisions, we would be disqualified from treatment as a REIT for the subsequent four taxable years following the year during which we lost our qualification and thus, our cash available for distribution to our stockholders would be reduced for each of the years during which we do not qualify as a REIT.

Securitizations could result in the creation of taxable mortgage pools for federal income tax purposes. As a REIT, so long as we own 100% of the equity interests in a taxable mortgage pool, we generally would not be adversely affected by the characterization of the securitization as a taxable mortgage pool. Certain categories of stockholders, however, such as foreign stockholders eligible for treaty or other benefits, stockholders with net operating losses and certain tax-exempt stockholders that are subject to unrelated business income tax, could be subject to increased taxes on a portion of their distribution income from us that is attributable to the taxable mortgage pool. In addition, to the extent that our stock is owned by tax-exempt "disqualified organizations," such as certain government-related entities and charitable remainder trusts that are not subject to tax on unrelated business income, we may incur a corporate level tax on a portion of our income from the taxable mortgage pool. In that case, we will reduce the amount of our distributions to any disqualified organization whose stock ownership gave rise to the tax. Moreover, we would be precluded from selling equity interests in these securitizations to outside investors or selling any debt securities issued in connection with these securitizations that might be considered to be equity interests for tax purposes. These limitations may prevent us from using certain techniques to maximize our returns from securitization transactions.

Neither ordinary nor capital gain distributions with respect to our common stock nor gain from the sale of common stock should generally constitute unrelated business taxable income to a tax-exempt investor. However, there are certain exceptions to this rule, including: (i) part of the income and gain recognized by certain qualified employee pension trusts with respect to our common stock may be treated as unrelated business taxable income if we become a "pension held" REIT and such qualified employee pension trust owns more than 10% of our common stock; (ii) part of the income and gain recognized by a tax-exempt investor with respect to our common stock would constitute unrelated business taxable income if the investor incurs debt in order to acquire the common stock; (iii) part or all of the income or gain recognized with respect to our common stock by social clubs, voluntary employee benefit associations, supplemental unemployment benefit trusts and qualified group legal services plans which are exempt from federal income taxation under the Code may be treated as unrelated business taxable income; and (iv) to the extent that we are (or a part of us, or a disregarded subsidiary of ours, is) a "taxable mortgage pool," (or if we hold residual interests in a REMIC), a portion of the distributions paid to a tax-exempt stockholder that is allocable to excess inclusion income may be treated as unrelated business taxable income.