Our executive officers and directors, other current and future principals of our Investment Adviser and certain members of our Investment Adviser's investment committee currently serve, and may continue to service, as officers, directors or principals of other entities and affiliates of our Investment Adviser and funds managed by our affiliates that operate in the same or a related line of business as we do. Currently, our executive officers, as well as the other principals of our Investment Adviser manage other funds affiliated with Carlyle, including other existing and future affiliated BDCs, including TCG BDC II,
Inc. and Carlyle Secured Lending III. In addition, our Investment Adviser's investment team has responsibilities for sourcing and managing U.S. middle market debt investments for certain other investment funds and accounts. Accordingly, they have obligations to investors in those entities, the fulfillment of which may not be in the best interests of, or may be adverse to the interests of, us or our stockholders. Although the professional staff of our Investment Adviser will devote as much time to our management as appropriate to enable our Investment Adviser to perform its duties in accordance with the Investment Advisory Agreement, the investment professionals of our Investment Adviser may have conflicts in allocating their time and services among us, on the one hand, and investment vehicles managed by Carlyle or one or more of its affiliates on the other hand.
Our Investment Adviser and its affiliated investment managers may face conflicts in allocating investment opportunities between us and affiliated investment vehicles that have overlapping objectives with ours. For example, certain affiliated investment vehicles may have arrangements that provide for higher management or incentive fees, greater expense reimbursements or overhead allocations, or permit the Investment Adviser and its affiliates to receive transaction fees not permitted under the Investment Company Act, all of which may contribute to this conflict of interest and create an incentive for our Investment Adviser or its affiliated managers to favor such other accounts. Furthermore, our Investment Adviser and its affiliated investment managers may form vehicles for the benefit of third-party investors that will be entitled to a portion of the allocation with respect to an investment. Such co-investment rights could result in us being allocated a smaller share of an investment than would otherwise be the case in the absence of such co-investment rights. Although our Investment Adviser will endeavor to allocate investment opportunities in a fair and equitable manner in accordance with its allocation policies and procedures, it is possible that, in the future, we may not be given the opportunity to participate in investments made by investment funds managed by our Investment Adviser or an investment manager affiliated with our Investment Adviser, including Carlyle.
We and our affiliates own, and may continue to own, investments at different levels of a portfolio company's capital structure or otherwise own different classes of a portfolio company's securities, which may give rise to conflicts of interest or perceived conflicts of interest. Conflicts may also arise because portfolio decisions regarding our portfolio may benefit our affiliates. Our affiliates may pursue or enforce rights with respect to one of our portfolio companies, and those activities may have an adverse effect on us.
It is possible that Carlyle or an affiliated investment vehicle will invest in a company that is or becomes a competitor of a portfolio company of ours. Such investment could create a conflict between us, on the one hand, and Carlyle or the affiliated investment vehicle, on the other hand. In such a situation, Carlyle or our Investment Adviser may also have a conflict in the allocation of its own resources to our portfolio company. In addition, certain affiliated investment vehicles will be focused primarily on investing in other funds that may have strategies that overlap and/or directly conflict and compete with us.
As a result of the expansion of Carlyle's platform into various lines of business in the alternative asset management industry, Carlyle is subject to a number of actual and potential conflicts of interest and subject to greater regulatory oversight than that to which it would otherwise be subject if it had just one line of business. In addition, as Carlyle expands its platform, the allocation of investment opportunities among its investment funds, including us, is expected to become more complex. In addressing these conflicts and regulatory requirements across Carlyle's various businesses, Carlyle has implemented, and may continue to implement, certain policies and procedures. For example, Carlyle has established an information barrier between Carlyle Global Credit, on the one hand, and the rest of Carlyle, on the other, which generally restricts the communications of Carlyle Global Credit with other Carlyle investment professionals pursuant to the information barrier policy. In addition, we may come into possession of material non-public information with respect to issuers in which we may be considering making an investment. As a consequence, we may be precluded from providing such information or other ideas to other funds affiliated with Carlyle that may benefit from such information or we may be precluded from otherwise consummating a contemplated investment. To the extent we or any other funds affiliated with Carlyle fail to appropriately deal with any such conflicts, it could negatively impact our reputation or Carlyle's reputation and our ability to raise additional funds and the willingness of counterparties to do business with us or result in potential litigation against us.
In the ordinary course of business, we enter, and may continue to enter, into transactions with affiliates and portfolio companies that may be considered related party transactions. We have implemented certain policies and procedures whereby certain of our executive officers screen each of our transactions for any possible affiliations between the proposed portfolio investment, us and other affiliated persons, including our Investment Adviser, stockholders that own more than 5% of us, employees, officers and directors of us and our Investment Adviser and certain persons directly or indirectly controlling, controlled by or under common control with the foregoing persons. We will not enter into any agreements unless and until we are satisfied that doing so will not raise concerns under the Investment Company Act or, if such concerns exist, we have taken appropriate actions to seek Board of Directors review and approval or SEC exemptive relief for such transaction.
In the course of our investing activities, we pay management and incentive fees to our Investment Adviser and reimburse our Investment Adviser for certain expenses it incurs in accordance with our Investment Advisory Agreement. The base management fee is based on our gross assets and the incentive fee is paid on income, both of which include leverage. As a result, investors in our common stock invest on a "gross" basis and receive distributions on a "net" basis after expenses, resulting in a lower rate of return than an investor might achieve through direct investments. Because these fees are based on gross assets, our Investment Adviser benefits to the extent we incur debt or use leverage. Accordingly, there may be times when the senior management team of our Investment Adviser has interests that differ from those of our stockholders, giving rise to a conflict.
In addition, we pay our Administrator, an affiliate of our Investment Adviser, its costs and expenses and our allocable portion of overhead incurred by it in performing its obligations under the Administration Agreement, including, compensation paid to or compensatory distributions received by our officers (including our Chief Compliance Officer, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer) and their respective staff who provide services to us, operations staff who provide services to us, and internal audit staff in their role of performing our Sarbanes-Oxley Act internal control assessment. These arrangements create conflicts of interest that our Board of Directors monitors. Despite Carlyle's good faith judgment to arrive at a fair and reasonable expense allocation methodology, the use of any particular methodology may lead us to bear relatively more expense in certain instances and relatively less in other instances compared to what we would have borne if a different methodology had been used. However, Carlyle seeks to make allocations that are equitable on an overall basis in its good faith judgment.