Risk Factors Dashboard

Item 1A. Risk Factors.

An investment in Power REIT’s securities involves significant risks. Anyone who is making an investment decision regarding Power REIT’s securities should, before making that decision, carefully consider the following risk factors, together with all of the other information included in, or incorporated by reference into, this document. Additional risks and uncertainties not currently known to us or that we currently deem immaterial may also have a material adverse effect on our business, operations and future performance. If any of the circumstances contemplated in the following risk factors were to occur, Power REIT’s business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects could all be materially adversely affected. In any such case, you could lose all or part of your investment.

Risks Related to our Financial Position and Liquidity

We have incurred a loss for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2025 and may be unable to generate sufficient revenue to cover expenses or generate net income.

For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2025, we had a net loss attributable to common shareholders of $2.8 million. For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2024, we had a net loss attributable to common shareholders of $25.4 million. There can be no assurance that we will be able to generate sufficient revenue to pay our expenses or generate net income.

As of December 31, 2025, we had an accumulated deficit of $51.9 million.

On a consolidated basis, the Trust’s cash, cash equivalents and restricted cash totaled $2,235,306 as of December 31, 2025, an increase of $3,720 from December 31, 2024

We may need to raise additional capital or sell additional properties to fund our operations in order to continue as a going concern.

As of December 31, 2025, we had an accumulated deficit of $51.9 million and a net loss attributable to common shareholders of $2.8 million. As of December 31, 2025, the Trust had approximately $2.2 million of cash and approximately $452,000 of accounts payable and approximately $1.36 million of liabilities for assets held for sale.

The Trust determined that there was substantial doubt as to its ability to continue as a going concern for a period of twelve months from the date of the filing with the SEC of this Annual Report on Form 10-K as a result of net losses incurred, and property expenses related to its greenhouse portfolio.

It is the Trust’s plan to focus on selling properties, entering into new leases, improving cash collections from existing tenants and the raising capital in the form of debt or equity is effectively implemented, the Trust’s plan could potentially provide enough liquidity to fund its operations. However, the Trust cannot predict, with certainty, the outcome of its actions to generate liquidity, including its ability to sell properties, and the failure to do so could negatively impact its future operations.

On January 24, 2025, the Trust entered into a sales agreement (the “Sales Agreement”), with AGP pursuant to which it may, from time to time, issue and sell its common shares in an “at the market offering,” however, AGP is not obligated to sell any common shares and there are limits on the dollar amount of common shares it can sell pursuant to the Sales Agreement. In addition, the Trust’s ability to raise capital through the sale of securities may be limited by the rules of the SEC and NYSE American LLC (“NYSE American”) that place limits on the number and dollar amount of securities that may be sold. There can be no assurances that the Trust will be able to raise the funds needed through the Sales Agreement, especially in light of the fact that its ability to sell securities registered on its registration statement on Form S-3 will be limited until such time as the market value of the Trust’s voting securities held by non-affiliates is $75 million or more. As of December 31, 2025, 271,832 common shares have been sold pursuant to the Sales Agreement for gross proceeds of $287,604.

If our acquisitions or our overall business performance fail to meet expectations, we could be restricted from paying dividends to shareholders and default on our loans, which are secured by collateral in our properties and assets.

We may not be able to achieve operating results that will allow us to pay dividends at a specific level or to increase the amount of these dividends from time to time. Also, restrictions and provisions in any credit facilities we enter into or any debt securities we issue may limit our ability to pay dividends. We cannot assure you that you will receive dividends at a particular time, or at a particular level, or at all.

PW Regulus Solar, LLC (“PWRS”), one of our subsidiaries, entered into the 2015 PWRS Loan Agreement (as defined below) that is non-recourse to Power REIT and secured by all of PWRS’ interest in the land and intangibles. As of December 31, 2025, the balance of the 2015 PWRS Loan was approximately $5,998,000 (net of unamortized debt costs of approximately $190,000).

Pittsburgh & West Virginia Railroad (“PWV”), one of our subsidiaries, entered into a Loan Agreement in the amount of $15,500,000 that is non-recourse to Power REIT and secured by our equity interest in our subsidiary PWV which is pledged as collateral. The balance of the loan as of December 31, 2025 is $13,974,000 (net of approximately $258,000 of capitalized debt costs).

We have substantial debt and preferred shares outstanding with substantial liquidation preference, which could adversely affect our overall financial health and our operating flexibility.

We have substantial debt and preferred shares outstanding with substantial liquidation preference. These obligations limit our financial flexibility. If we are unable to satisfy these obligations, we might default on our debt and our financial condition and results of operations would be adversely affected.

In an effort to conserve liquidity and create financial flexibility, the Trust has not declared dividends on its preferred shares since the fourth quarter of 2022. As a result, unpaid dividends increase the liquidation preference for our preferred shares. As of December 31, 2025, the amount of unpaid dividends on the outstanding preferred shares is approximately $2,122,000.

Our obligations arising from our indebtedness and property taxes arrearages could have negative consequences to our shareholders. Our failure to meet our obligations under our debt, could result in us losing assets due to foreclosure or sale on unfavorable terms such as happened with respect to the settlement of the Greenhouse Loan. Also, our indebtedness and debt service might limit our ability to refinance existing debt or to do so at a reasonable cost, might make us more vulnerable to adverse economic and market conditions, might limit our ability to take advantage of opportunities, and might discourage business partners from working with us.

Furthermore, since a significant percentage of our assets are used to secure our debt, this reduces the amount of collateral available for future secured debt or credit support and reduces our flexibility in how we handle these secured assets. This level of debt and related security could also limit our ability to borrow additional amounts for working capital, capital expenditures, debt service requirements, execution of our business strategy or other purposes and could limit our ability to use operating cash flow in other areas of our business because we must dedicate a substantial portion of these funds to service debt.

In addition to our current debt, we might incur additional debt in the future in order to finance improvements or development of properties, acquisitions or for other general corporate purposes, which could exacerbate the risks described above. These consequences could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

If we are unable to comply with the covenants in our loan agreements, we might be adversely affected.

We currently have secured debt against properties in our portfolio, and we may incur additional debt. The percentage of leverage we employ will vary depending on our available capital, our ability to obtain and access financing arrangements with lenders, debt restrictions contained in financing arrangements. We may significantly increase the amount of leverage we utilize at any time which could materially and adversely affect us, including the risk that:

If any one of these events were to occur, our business (including our financial performance and condition) and our ability to make distributions to our stockholders would likely be materially and adversely affected.

Secured indebtedness exposes us to the possibility of foreclosure, which could result in the loss of our investment in certain of our subsidiaries or in a property or group of properties or other assets subject to indebtedness.

We have granted lenders security interests in certain of our assets and may do so in the future. Incurring secured indebtedness, including mortgage indebtedness, increases our risk of asset and property losses because defaults on indebtedness secured by our assets, may result in foreclosure actions initiated by lenders and ultimately our loss of the property or other assets securing any loans for which we are in default. Any foreclosure on a mortgaged property or group of properties could have a material adverse effect on the overall value of our portfolio of properties and more generally on our business.

We are in arrears on property taxes for certain of the Greenhouse Portfolio properties, which exposes us to the possibility of foreclosure.

We currently are in arrears on property taxes for certain Greenhouse Portfolio properties. Unpaid property taxes represent a senior lien on the real estate asset which can ultimately result in the loss of the property through tax foreclosure.

Risks Related to our Operations

Changes in general economic conditions, geopolitical conditions, domestic and foreign trade policies, monetary policies and other factors beyond our control may adversely impact our business and operating results.

Our operations and performance depend on global, regional and U.S. economic and geopolitical conditions. General worldwide economic conditions have experienced significant instability in recent years including the recent global economic uncertainty and financial market conditions.

The uncertain financial markets, disruptions in supply chains, mobility restraints, and changing priorities as well as volatile asset values could impact our business in the future.

Further increasing inflation has raised operating costs for many businesses and, in the future, could impact foreign exchange rates or employee wages. Inflation rates, particularly in the United States, have increased recently to levels not seen in years, and increased inflation may result in increases in our operating costs (including our labor costs), reduced liquidity and limits on our ability to access credit or otherwise raise capital. In addition, the Federal Reserve has raised, and may again raise, interest rates in response to concerns about inflation, which coupled with reduced government spending and volatility in financial markets may have the effect of further increasing economic uncertainty and heightening these risks.

Actual events involving reduced or limited liquidity, defaults, non-performance or other adverse developments that affect financial institutions or other companies in the financial services industry or the financial services industry generally, or concerns or rumors about any events of these kinds, have in the past and may in the future lead to market-wide liquidity problems.

We are actively monitoring the effects these disruptions and increasing inflation could have on our operations.

These conditions make it extremely difficult for us to accurately forecast and plan future business activities.

In addition, the outbreak of a pandemic could disrupt our operations and could have material and adverse effects on our tenants and their operations, and in turn on our performance, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows due to, among other factors:

	●	because of the federal regulatory uncertainty relating to the regulated cannabis industry, our tenants may not be eligible for financial relief
	●	delays in construction at our properties may adversely impact our tenants’ ability to commence operations and generate revenues from projects, including

	●	a general decline in business activity in the regulated cannabis industry would adversely affect our ability to grow our portfolio of regulated
	●	the potential negative impact on the health of our personnel, particularly if a significant number of them are impacted, would result in a deterioration in our ability

Our greenhouse properties are related to a nascent industry resulting in payment and other lease defaults and a significant portion of the Greenhouse Portfolio is vacant which can result in a deterioration of value.

In July 2019, we announced our new investment focus of CEA and our first greenhouse property acquisition. As the Greenhouse Portfolio has expanded, we continue to be subject to many of the business risks and uncertainties associated with any new business enterprise. Furthermore, our tenants and properties are concentrated in the regulated cannabis industry, an industry in its early stages of development with significant uncertainties, and we cannot predict how tenant demand and competition for these properties will change over time. We cannot predict the nature of any future laws, regulations, interpretations or applications, especially in the United States, nor can we determine what effect additional governmental regulations or administrative policies and procedures, when and if promulgated, could have on our business. Unfortunately, the market for cannabis compressed dramatically during 2023 and 2024. This has had a dramatic negative effect on our Greenhouse Portfolio, with most properties vacant or occupied by tenants that are in default, which can result in a deterioration of value. We cannot assure you that we will be able to operate our business successfully or profitably or find additional suitable investments. There can be no assurance that we will be able to continue to generate sufficient revenue from operations to pay our operating expenses and make distributions to stockholders. The results of our operations and the execution on our business plan depend on the availability of additional opportunities for investment, the performance of our existing properties and tenants, the evolution of tenant demand for regulated cannabis facilities, competition, the evolution of alternative capital sources for potential tenants, the availability of adequate equity and debt financing, the federal and state regulatory environment relating to the regulated cannabis industry, and conditions in the financial markets and economic conditions.

Our tenants have limited operating histories and may be more susceptible to payment and other lease defaults, which could continue to materially and adversely affect our business

Single tenants currently occupy our properties, and we expect that our properties will continue to be operated by single tenants. Therefore, the success of our investments will be dependent on the financial stability of these tenants. We rely on our management team to perform due diligence investigations of our potential tenants, related guarantors and their properties, operations and prospects, of which there is often very little public operating and financial information. Environmental laws and regulations may impose joint and several liabilities on tenants, owners or operators for the costs to investigate and remediate contaminated properties, regardless of fault or whether the acts causing the contamination were legal. We may not learn all of the material information we need to know regarding these businesses through our investigations, and these businesses are subject to numerous risks and uncertainties, including but not limited to regulatory risks and the rapidly evolving market dynamics of each state’s regulated cannabis market. As a result, it is possible that we could enter into leases with tenants that ultimately are unable to pay rent to us, as is the case with most of our CEA properties, which could adversely impact our business.

In addition, in general, our tenants are more vulnerable to adverse conditions resulting from federal and state regulations affecting their businesses or industries or other changes in the marketplace for their products and have limited access to traditional forms of financing. The success of our tenants will heavily depend on the growth and development of the state markets in which the tenants operate, many of which have a very limited history or are still in the stages of establishing the regulatory framework.

Any lease payment defaults by a tenant has and could adversely affect our cash flows and cause us to reduce the amount of distributions to stockholders. In the event of a default by a tenant, we may also experience delays in enforcing our rights as landlord and may incur substantial costs in protecting our investment and re-leasing our property as cannabis operators are generally subject to extensive state licensing requirements.

Our greenhouse tenants may be unable to renew or maintain their licenses and authorizations for their cannabis operations, which may result in such tenants not being able to operate their businesses and defaulting on their lease payments.

We rely on our tenants to renew or otherwise maintain the required state and local cannabis licenses and other authorizations on a continuous basis. If one or more of our tenants are unable to remain compliant, such tenants may default on their lease payments and may also subject us, as the owner of such properties, to potential penalties, fines or other liabilities.

Our business activities, and the business activities of our cannabis tenants, while believed to be compliant with applicable U.S. state and local laws, are currently illegal under U.S. federal law.

While certain states in the U.S. have legalized “medical cannabis,” “adult-use cannabis” or both, medical and adult-use cannabis remains illegal under federal law. The CSA currently classifies “marijuana” as a Schedule I drug. Under U.S. federal law, a drug or other substance is placed on Schedule I if:

However, the recently issued Trump Executive Order directs federal agencies to reclassify marijuana from a Schedule I to a Schedule III controlled substance under the CSA. Schedule III status acknowledges accepted medical use and a lower potential for abuse, and would ease certain restrictions on research and taxation. Key components of the Trump Executive Order include: (i) directing the Attorney General and DEA to complete the process of moving marijuana to Schedule III as quickly as legally permissible; (ii) directives to work with Congress on ensuring access to appropriate full-spectrum CBD products, while restricting high-risk cannabinoid products; and (iii) directing HHS to improve research methods and real-world evidence collection, with the goal of increasing medical marijuana and cannabidiol (CBD) research. It remains unclear how long the reclassification process will take or whether reclassification will result in cannabis companies no longer being subject to Section 280E of the Code. The reclassification of marijuana as a Schedule III controlled substance under the CSA, once complete, will not federally legalize marijuana.

As such, cannabis-related business activities, including, without limitation, the cultivation, manufacture, importation, possession, use or distribution of cannabis, remains illegal under U.S. federal law. Although we believe our cannabis-related activities are compliant with the laws and regulations of the states in which the properties are located, strict compliance with state and local rules and regulations with respect to cannabis neither absolves us of liability under U.S. federal law, nor provides a defense to any proceeding that may be brought against us under U.S. federal law. Furthermore, we cannot give any assurance that our cannabis tenants, and any future cannabis tenants, are currently operating, and will continue to operate, in strict compliance with state and local rules and regulations in which they operate. Furthermore, we cannot give any assurance that our cannabis tenant, and any future cannabis tenants, are currently operating, and will continue to operate, in strict compliance with state and local rules and regulations in which they operate. Any proceeding that may be brought against us could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Violations of any U.S. federal laws and regulations could result in significant fines, penalties, administrative sanctions, convictions or settlements, arising from either civil or criminal proceedings brought by either the U.S. federal government or private citizens, including, but not limited to, property seizures, disgorgement of profits, cessation of business activities or divestiture. Such fines, penalties, administrative sanctions, convictions or settlements could have a material adverse effect on us, including, but not limited to:

Certain of Power REIT’s properties have been negatively impacted by state and local government regulations and approvals that relate to cannabis cultivation. Power REIT does not believe that its business is likely in the future to be negatively impacted by existing or probable federal government regulation or the need for any federal governmental approval.

Our business strategy includes growth plans. Our financial condition and results of operations could be negatively affected if we fail to grow or fail to manage our growth or investments effectively.

Power REIT is pursuing a growth strategy focused on non-traditional asset classes that qualify as real estate for REIT purposes. Our prospects must be considered in light of the risks, expenses and difficulties frequently encountered by companies in significant growth stages of development. We cannot assure you that we will be able to expand our market presence in our existing markets or successfully enter new markets or that any such expansion will not adversely affect our results of operations. Failure to manage potential transactions to successful conclusions, or failure more generally to manage our growth effectively, could have a material adverse effect on our business, future prospects, financial condition or results of operations and could adversely affect our ability to successfully implement our business strategy or pay dividends in the future.

Even if we are able to execute our business strategy, that strategy may not be successful.

Even if we are able to expand our business as we intend, our investments may not be successful due to a variety of factors, including but not limited to asset under-performance, higher than forecast expenses, failure or delinquency on the part of our lessees, changes in market conditions or other factors, any of which may result in lower returns than expected and may adversely affect our financial condition, results of operations and ability to pay dividends.

We operate in a highly competitive market for investment opportunities and we may be unable to identify and complete acquisitions of real property assets.

We compete with public and private funds, commercial and investment banks, commercial financing companies and public and private REITs to make the types of investments that we plan to make. Many of our competitors are substantially larger and have considerably greater financial, technical and marketing resources than us. For example, some competitors may have a lower cost of funds and access to funding sources that are currently not available to us. In addition, some of our competitors may have higher risk tolerances or different risk assessments, allowing them to pay higher consideration, consider a wider variety of investments and establish more effective relationships than us. Furthermore, many of our competitors are not subject to the restrictions that our REIT status imposes on us. These competitive conditions could adversely affect our ability to make investments in the infrastructure sector and could adversely affect our distributions to stockholders. Moreover, our ability to close transactions will be subject to our ability to access financing within stipulated contractual time frames, and there is no assurance that we will have access to such financing on terms that are favorable to us, if at all.

We acquired some of our properties, and expect to acquire other properties, “as-is” or otherwise with limited recourse to the prior owner, which significantly increases the risk of an investment.

We acquired some of our properties, and expect to acquire other real estate properties, “as is” or otherwise with limited recourse to the prior owner and with only limited representations and warranties from such prior owner regarding matters affecting the condition, use and ownership of the property. There may also be environmental or other conditions associated with properties we acquire of which we are unaware despite our diligence efforts or that we have identified during diligence If environmental contamination exists on properties we acquire or develops after acquisition, we could become subject to liability for the contamination. If defects in the property (including any building on the property) or other matters adversely affecting the property are discovered or otherwise subject us to unknown claims or liabilities, we may not be able to pursue a claim for any or all damages against the property seller. Such a situation could materially harm our business.

Because we may distribute a significant portion of our income to our stockholders or lenders, we will continue to need additional capital to make new investments. If additional funds are unavailable or not available on favorable terms, our ability to make new investments will be impaired.

Because we may distribute a significant portion of our income to our shareholders or lenders, our business may from time to time require substantial amounts of new capital to pursue our growth plans. In addition, in order to continue making acquisitions, we would require additional capital. We may acquire additional capital from the issuance of securities senior to our common shares, including additional borrowings or other indebtedness, preferred shares (such as our Series A Preferred Stock) or the issuance of other securities. We may also acquire additional capital through the issuance of additional common shares which will result in dilution to current shareholders. We may also acquire additional capital through the issuance of additional common shares. However, we may not be able to raise additional capital in the future, on favorable terms or at all. Unfavorable business, market or general economic conditions could increase our funding costs, limit our access to capital markets or result in a decision by lenders not to extend credit to us.

To the extent we issue debt securities, other instruments of indebtedness or additional preferred stock, or borrow additional money from banks or other financial institutions, we will be additionally exposed to risks associated with leverage, including increased risk of loss. If we issue additional preferred securities that rank senior to our common shares in our capital structure, the holders of such preferred securities may have separate voting rights and other rights, preferences or privileges, economic and otherwise, more favorable than those of our common shares, and the issuance of such preferred securities could have the effect of delaying, deferring or preventing a transaction or a change of control that might involve a premium price for common shareholders.

Any inability to access additional financing on terms that are favorable to us may adversely affect our ability to grow and our business generally.

The investment portfolio is, and in the future may continue to be, concentrated in its exposure to a relatively few numbers of investments, industries and lessees.

Historically, the Trust’s revenue has been derived from a relatively limited number of investments, industries and lessees. During the fiscal year ended December 31, 2025, Power REIT collected approximately 93% of its rental income and lease income from direct financing lease from two properties. The tenants are Norfolk Southern Railway and Regulus Solar LLC which represent 50% and 43% of rental income and lease income from direct financing lease, respectively, for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2025.

We are exposed to risks inherent in this sort of investment concentration. Financial difficulty or poor business performance on the part of any single lessee or a default on any single lease will expose us to a greater risk of loss than would be the case if we were more diversified and holding numerous investments, and the underperformance or non-performance of any of its assets may severely adversely affect our financial condition and results from operations. Financial difficulty or poor business performance on the part of any single lessee or a default on any single lease will expose the Company to a greater risk of loss than would be the case if the Company were more diversified and holding numerous investments, and the underperformance or non-performance of any of its assets may severely adversely affect the Company’s financial condition and results from operations. Our lessees could seek the protection of bankruptcy, insolvency or similar laws, which could result in the rejection and termination of our lease agreements and could cause a reduction in our cash flows. The Company’s lessees could seek the protection of bankruptcy, insolvency or similar laws, which could result in the rejection and termination of our lease agreements and could cause a reduction in the Company’s cash flows. Furthermore, our portfolio concentration in the CEA and cannabis sectors, has performed poorly and may continue to lag the broader market as a whole and also subjects us to more risks than if we were diversified across many sectors.

Our property portfolio has a high concentration of properties located in certain states.

Certain of our properties are located in areas that may experience catastrophic weather and other natural events from time to time, including hurricanes or other severe weather, flooding fires, snow or ice storms, windstorms or earthquakes. These adverse weather and natural events could cause substantial damages or losses to our properties which could exceed our insurance coverage. In the event of a loss in excess of insured limits, we could lose our capital invested in the affected property, as well as anticipated future revenue from that property. We could also continue to be obligated to repay any mortgage indebtedness or other obligations related to the property. Any such loss could materially and adversely affect our business and our financial condition and results of operations.

To the extent that significant changes in the climate occur, we may experience extreme weather and changes in precipitation and temperature and rising sea levels, all of which may result in physical damage to or a decrease in demand for properties located in these areas or affected by these conditions. Should the impact of climate change be material in nature, including destruction of our properties, or occur for lengthy periods of time, our financial condition or results of operations may be adversely affected. In addition, changes in federal and state legislation and regulation on climate change could result in us incurring increased capital expenditures to improve the energy efficiency of our existing properties or to protect them from the consequence of climate change.

Our operating results may be negatively affected by potential development and construction delays and cost overruns.

Several of our CEA properties were development projects that include risks associated with construction delays, costs and construction quality. In connection with our development activities, we are subject to uncertainties associated with zoning and other required approvals, environmental concerns of governmental entities or community groups and our builder or partner’s ability to build in conformity with plans, specifications, budgeted costs, and timetables. Performance also may be affected or delayed by conditions beyond our control. We may incur additional risks when we make periodic progress payments or other advances to builders before they complete construction. If a builder or development partner fails to perform, we may resort to legal action to rescind the purchase or the construction contract or to compel performance, but there can be no assurance any legal action would be successful. These and other factors can result in increased costs of a project or loss of our investment. In addition, we will be subject to normal lease-up risks relating to newly constructed projects. We also must rely on rental income and expense projections and estimates of the fair market value of property upon completion of construction when agreeing upon a price at the time we acquire the property. If our projections are inaccurate, we may pay too much for a property, and our return on our investment could suffer.

A failure to maintain properties can lead to deterioration of value.

A number of our CEA properties have suffered significant tenant defaults and tenants may not be properly adhering to their responsibilities related to maintaining the properties. Other CEA properties are vacant and may not have been properly maintained prior to the tenants vacating. There is the potential for deterioration of property value due to maintenance issues and incidences of theft of property materials which we have experienced.

We may not be able to timely sell our cannabis-related properties at attractive values, or at all, and the transition could adversely affect our results and financial condition.

Power REIT invested in greenhouses for state-licensed cannabis and food cultivation. Unfortunately, the market for both opportunities has been challenging and the Greenhouse Portfolio has performed poorly. Many of our Greenhouse Portfolio properties are unoccupied and certain tenants have experienced operating pressures, delinquencies, or restructurings. We may need to provide rent deferrals or concessions, pursue enforcement, or re-tenant properties, each with uncertain outcomes and costs. High vacancy levels and tenant distress in the cannabis sector may persist or worsen. Extended vacancy can trigger impairment and reduce net operating income and cash flows.

We are currently focused on monetizing the Greenhouse Portfolio, including focusing on selling and or re-leasing the vacant properties and increasing cash flow from the occupied properties. Market demand for assets historically used for cannabis cultivation is limited, financing for prospective buyers may be constrained, and regulatory uncertainty can depress valuations. Properties historically used for cannabis cultivation may face zoning constraints or environmental issues. Certain municipalities restrict future uses or impose remediation/retrofit requirements (e.g., odor mitigation, electrical upgrades, water/waste systems). We may incur capital expenditures or price reductions to address buyer diligence findings. Marketing processes may be prolonged, bidders may withdraw, and we may incur additional carrying costs (taxes, insurance, security, maintenance) and brokerage/transaction expenses. If sales occur below our carrying values, we could recognize losses or additional impairments. Delays or shortfalls in proceeds could adversely impact liquidity, debt service, and our ability to reinvest.

Power REIT will continue to seek to realize value from the retained assets and is exploring a shift in focus and is evaluating opportunistic real estate situations including properties, loans and companies and other opportunities.

A perceived difficulty of operating special purpose properties may affect profitably and property values.

Based on the state of the cannabis CEA industry, our current and prior tenants within our CEA portfolio have had difficulty generating profits. The value of these special purpose properties may continue to decline due to vacancies and the perceived difficulty of operating profitably.

The valuation and accounting treatment of certain long-lived assets, such as real estate, or of intangible assets, such as goodwill, could result in future asset impairments, which would be recorded as operating losses.

Real estate investments and related intangible assets are reviewed for impairment whenever events or changes in circumstances, such as a decrease in net operating income, the loss of a tenant or an agreement of sale at a price below book value, indicate that the carrying amount of the property might not be recoverable. An operating property to be held and used is considered impaired under applicable accounting authority only if management’s estimate of the aggregate future cash flows to be generated by the property, undiscounted and without interest charges, is less than the carrying value of the property. In addition, this estimate may consider a probability weighted cash flow estimation approach when alternative courses of action to recover the carrying amount of a long-lived asset are under consideration or when a range of possible values is estimated. In addition, if there are changes to the laws, regulations or administrative decisions and actions that affect us, we may have to incur significant expenses in order to comply, or we may have to restrict or change our operations. This estimate takes into consideration factors such as expected future net operating income, trends and prospects, and upcoming lease maturities, as well as the effects of demand, competition and other factors. If we find that the carrying value of real estate investments and related intangible assets has been impaired, we will recognize impairment with respect to such assets. Applicable accounting principles require that goodwill and certain intangible assets be tested for impairment annually or earlier upon the occurrence of certain events or substantive changes in circumstances. If we find that the carrying value of goodwill or certain intangible assets exceeds estimated fair value, we will reduce the carrying value of the real estate investment or goodwill or intangible asset to the estimated fair value, and we will recognize impairment with respect to such investments or goodwill or intangible assets.

Impairment of long-lived assets is required to be recorded as a non-cash operating expense. During the fourth quarter of 2022, the third quarter of 2023, all four quarters of 2024 and the last three quarters of 2025, the Trust concluded that an impairment of value of certain assets within its CEA portfolio was appropriate based on market conditions. These impairments also take into account assets held for sale and the write off of the lease of any associated lease intangible. In 2025, we recorded approximately $562,000 in non-cash impairment charges, In 2024, we recorded approximately $20 million in non-cash impairment charges. In 2023, we recorded approximately $8.2 million in non-cash impairment charges. In 2022, we recorded approximately $16.7 million in non-cash impairment charges. Any decline in the estimated fair values of our assets could result in additional impairment charges in the future. It is possible that such impairments, if required, could be material. There can be no assurance that the impaired carrying values will equate to the ultimately realizable value of such assets.

The illiquidity of real estate investments might delay or prevent us from selling properties that we determine no longer meet the strategic and financial criteria we apply and could significantly affect our ability to respond in a timely manner to adverse changes in the performance of our properties and harm our financial condition.

Substantially all of our assets consist of investments in real properties, and we review our portfolio regularly. Because real estate investments are relatively illiquid, our ability to quickly sell one or more properties in our portfolio in response to our evaluation or to changing economic and financial conditions is limited. The real estate market is affected by many factors that are beyond our control, such as general economic conditions, the availability of financing, interest rates, the supply and demand for space, and since our assets are special purpose, the underlying market for the use of such assets can further affect its liquidity. These conditions may result in fluctuations in the market prices of stocks generally and, in turn, the Company’s securities, as well as sales of substantial amounts of the Company’s securities in the market, in each case to a degree that could be unrelated or disproportionate to any changes in the Company’s operating performance. We cannot predict whether we will be able to sell any property for the price or on the terms we set, or whether any price or other terms offered by a prospective purchaser would be acceptable to us. The number of prospective buyers interested in purchasing CEA properties is limited. We also cannot predict the length of time needed to find a willing purchaser and to close the sale of a property. In addition, prospective buyers might experience increased costs of debt financing or other difficulties in obtaining debt financing, which might make it more difficult for us to sell properties or might adversely affect the price we receive for properties that we do sell.

Many factors, including changes in interest rates and the negative perceptions of the cannabis sector generally, can have an adverse effect on the value of our assets, our access to debt financing and the trading price of our securities.

As is the case with other publicly traded companies, a number of factors might adversely affect the price of our securities, many of which are beyond our control. These factors include:

●

Increases in market interest rates, which could cause certain prospective purchasers to invest elsewhere. The value of our investments in certain assets may decline if long-term interest rates increase. The value of our investments in certain assets may decline if long-term interest rates increase. Interest rates have risen significantly of late relative to their recent historically low levels which will continue to have a negative impact on the perceived or actual values of our assets and dividends, and consequently the prices of our securities may decline. Higher market interest rates would not, however, result in more funds being available for us to distribute to shareholders and, to the contrary, would likely increase our borrowing costs and potentially decrease funds available for distribution to our shareholders, if any. Thus, higher market interest rates could cause the market price of our shares to decrease;

Furthermore, to the extent the Trust has borrowed funds, a rise in interest rates may result in re-financing risk when those borrowings become due, and the Trust may be required to pay higher interest rates or issue additional equity to refinance its borrowings, which could adversely affect the Trust’s financial condition and results of operations.

Individual taxpayers might perceive REIT securities as less desirable relative to the securities of other corporations because of the lower tax rate on certain dividends from such corporations to the extent we pay dividends in the future, which might have an adverse effect on the market value of our securities.

Currently, the maximum federal income tax rate on dividends, excluding tax on net investment income, from most publicly traded corporations is 20%. Dividends from REITs, however, do not qualify for this favorable tax treatment, and the maximum federal income tax rate on dividends from REITs is 29.6% (which excludes tax on new investment income). It is possible also that tax legislation enacted in subsequent years might increase this rate differential. We have suspended payments of dividends to our common and we have deferred payments on our preferred shares. To the extent we pay dividends in the future, the differing treatment of dividends received from REITs and other corporations might cause individual investors to view an investment in REITs as less attractive relative to other corporations, which might negatively affect the value of our shares.

The issuance of securities with claims that are senior to those of our common shares, including our Series A Preferred Stock, may limit or prevent us from paying dividends on our common shares. There is no limitation on our ability to issue securities senior to the Trust’s common shares or incur indebtedness. There is no limitation on the Company’s ability to issue securities senior to the Company’s common shares or incur indebtedness.

Our common shares are equity interests that rank junior to our indebtedness and other non-equity claims with respect to assets available to satisfy claims against us, and junior to our preferred securities that by their terms rank senior to our common shares in our capital structure, including our Series A Preferred Stock. As of December 31, 2025, we had outstanding debt in the principal amount of $20 million. As of December 31, 2025, we have issued approximately $8.5 million of our Series A Preferred Stock not including dividends which are cumulative and have not been declared. This debt and these preferred securities rank senior to the Trust’s common shares in our capital structure. This debt and these preferred securities rank senior to the Company’s common shares in the Company’s capital structure. It is possible that we may incur more debt, and issue additional preferred securities as we pursue our business strategy.

In the case of indebtedness, specified amounts of principal and interest are customarily payable on specified due dates. In the case of preferred securities, such as our Series A Preferred Stock, holders are provided with a senior claim to distributions, according to the specific terms of the securities. In the case of preferred securities, such as the Company’s Series A Preferred Stock, holders are provided with a senior claim to distributions, according to the specific terms of the securities. In contrast, however, in the case of common shares, dividends are payable only when, as and if declared by the Trust’s board of trustees and depend on, among other things, the Trust’s results of operations, financial condition, debt service requirements, obligations to pay distributions to holders of preferred securities, such as the Series A Preferred Stock, other cash needs and any other factors that the board of trustees may deem relevant or that they are required to consider as a matter of law. In contrast, however, in the case of common shares, dividends are payable only when, as and if declared by the Company’s Board of Trustees and depend on, among other things, the Company’s results of operations, financial condition, debt service requirements, obligations to pay distributions to holders of preferred securities, such as the Series A Preferred Stock, other cash needs and any other factors that the Board of Trustees may deem relevant or that they are required to consider as a matter of law. Incurring additional debt or issuing additional preferred securities, may limit or eliminate the amounts available to the Trust to pay dividends on our Series A Preferred Stock and common shares.

We are dependent upon Mr. David H. Lesser for our success.

We are dependent on the diligence, expertise and business relationships of our management team, particularly Mr. David H. Lesser our Chairman and Chief Executive Officer and Susan Hollander our Chief Accounting Officer, to implement our strategy of acquiring and benefitting from the ownership of infrastructure-related real property assets. If Mr. Lesser or Ms. Lesser for our success. Hollander were unable to function on behalf of the Trust, the Trust’s business and prospects would be adversely affected. Moreover, Mr. Lesser has other business interests to which he dedicates a portion of his time that are unrelated to Power REIT. Although Mr. Lesser is one of our major shareholders, on occasion, those other interests of his may conflict with his interests in Power REIT, and such conflicts may be unfavorable to us.

From time to time, our management team may own interests in our lessees or other counterparties, and may thereby have interests that conflict or appear to conflict with the Trust’s interests.

On occasion, our management may have financial interests that conflict, or appear to conflict with the Trust’s interests. Although our Declaration of Trust permits this type of business relationship and a majority of our disinterested trustees must approve, and in those instances did approve, Power REIT’s involvement in such transactions, in any such circumstance, there may be conflicts of interest between Power REIT on one hand, and such affiliate on the other hand, and such conflicts may be unfavorable to us. Although our Declaration of Trust, as amended, restated and supplemented (and which we occasionally refer to herein as our “charter”) permits this type of business relationship and a majority of our disinterested trustees must approve any such transaction, in any such circumstance, there may be conflicts of interest between Power REIT on one hand, and the relevant member or members of our management team on the other hand, and these conflicts may be unfavorable to us.

Our lessees and many future lessees will likely be structured as special purpose vehicles (“SPVs”), and therefore their ability to pay us is expected to be dependent solely on the revenues of a specific project, without additional credit support.

Most of our lessees will likely be structured as SPVs whose only source of cash flow will be from the operations of a single property. If the property fails to perform as projected, the SPV lessee might not have sufficient cash flow to make lease or interest payments to us. If the facility fails to perform as projected, the SPV lessee might not have sufficient cash flow to make lease or interest payments to us. While we would expect the lenders or other parties connected to such SPVs to step in and continue to make payments to us, there can be no assurance that such parties would do so, rather than, for example, liquidating the facility. Further, if the property materially underperforms or if energy supply contracts or other contracts are cancelled, there may be little value in such SPV lessees, and our investments in real estate may become impaired. Further, if the facility materially underperforms or if energy supply contracts or other contracts are cancelled, there may be little value in such SPV lessees, and our investments in real estate relating to their facilities may become impaired.

Some losses related to our real property assets may not be covered by insurance or indemnified by our lessees, and so could adversely affect us.

Our leases generally require our lessees to carry insurance on our properties against risks customarily insured against by other companies engaged in similar businesses in the same geographic region, and to indemnify us against certain losses. However, there are some types of losses, including catastrophic acts of nature, acts of war or riots, for which we or our lessees cannot obtain insurance at an acceptable cost. Also, certain of our vacant properties are not covered by insurance. If there is an uninsured loss or a loss in excess of insurance limits, we could lose the revenues generated by the affected property and the capital we have invested in the property, assuming our lessee fails to pay us the casualty value in excess of such insurance limit, if any, or to indemnify us for such loss. Nevertheless, in such a circumstance we might still remain obligated to repay any secured indebtedness or other obligations related to the property. Any of the foregoing could adversely affect our financial condition or results of operations.

Discovery of previously undetected environmentally hazardous conditions may adversely affect our operating results.

We are subject to various federal, state and local laws and regulations that (a) regulate certain activities and operations that may have environmental or health and safety effects, such as the management, generation, release or disposal of regulated materials, substances or wastes, (b) impose liability for the costs of cleaning up, and damages to natural resources from, past spills, waste disposals on and off-site, or other releases of hazardous materials or regulated substances, and (c) regulate workplace safety. Compliance with these laws and regulations could increase our operational costs. Violation of these laws may subject us to significant fines, penalties or disposal costs, which could negatively impact our results of operations, financial position and cash flows. Under various federal, state and local environmental laws (including those of foreign jurisdictions), a current or previous owner or operator of currently or formerly owned, leased or operated real property may be liable for the cost of removal or remediation of hazardous or toxic substances on, under or in such property. The costs of removal or remediation could be substantial. Such laws often impose liability whether or not the owner or operator knew of, or was responsible for, the presence of such hazardous or toxic substances. Certain environmental laws and common law principles could be used to impose liability for release of and exposure to hazardous substances, including asbestos-containing materials into the air, and third parties may seek recovery from owners or operators of real properties for personal injury or property damage associated with exposure to released hazardous substances. In addition, when excessive moisture accumulates in buildings or on building materials, mold growth may occur, particularly if the moisture problem remains undiscovered or is not addressed over a period of time. Some molds may produce airborne toxins or irritants. Concern about indoor exposure to mold has been increasing, as exposure to mold may cause a variety of adverse health effects and symptoms, including allergic or other reactions. As a result, the presence of significant mold at any of our properties could require us to undertake a costly remediation program to contain or remove the mold from the affected property or development project.

Accordingly, we may incur significant costs to defend against claims of liability, to comply with environmental regulatory requirements, to remediate any contaminated property, or to pay personal injury claims.

Moreover, environmental laws also may impose liens on property or other restrictions on the manner in which property may be used or businesses may be operated, and these restrictions may require substantial expenditures or prevent us or our lessees from operating such properties. Compliance with new or more stringent laws or regulations or stricter interpretation of existing laws may require us to incur material expenditures. Future laws, ordinances or regulations or the discovery of currently unknown conditions or non-compliances may impose material liability under environmental laws.

Legislative, regulatory, accounting or tax rules, and any changes to them or actions brought to enforce them, could adversely affect us.

We and our lessees are subject to a wide range of legislative, regulatory, accounting and tax rules. The costs and efforts of compliance with these laws, or of defending against actions brought to enforce them, could adversely affect us, either directly if we are subject to such laws or actions, or indirectly if our lessees are subject to them.

In addition, if there are changes to the laws, regulations or administrative decisions and actions that affect us, we may have to incur significant expenses in order to comply, or we may have to restrict or change our operations. For example, changes to the accounting treatment of leases by both lessors and lessees under accounting principles generally accepted in the United States (“GAAP”) could change the presentation of information in our financial statements and as a result affect the perception of our business and our growth plans. Changes to Internal Revenue Service interpretations of “real assets” or changes to the REIT portion of the Code could affect our plans, operations, financial condition and share price. Changes to Internal Revenue Service interpretations of “real assets” or changes to the REIT portion of the Internal Revenue Code could affect our plans, operations, financial condition and share price.

We have invested, and expect to continue to invest, in real property assets which are subject to laws and regulations relating to the protection of the environment and human health and safety. These laws and regulations generally govern wastewater discharges, noise levels, air emissions, the operation and removal of underground and above-ground storage tanks, the use, storage, treatment, transportation and disposal of solid and hazardous materials and the remediation of contamination associated with disposals. Environmental laws and regulations may impose joint and several liabilities on tenants, owners or operators for the costs to investigate and remediate contaminated properties, regardless of fault or whether the acts causing the contamination were legal. This liability could be substantial. In addition, the presence of hazardous substances, or the failure to properly remediate these substances, could adversely affect our ability to sell, rent or pledge an affected property as collateral for future borrowings. We intend to take commercially reasonable steps when we can to protect ourselves from the risks of environmental law liability; however, we will not obtain independent third-party environmental assessments for every property we acquire. In addition, any such assessments that we do obtain may not reveal all environmental liabilities, or whether a prior owner of a property created a material environmental condition not known to us. In addition, there are various local, state and federal fire, health, safety and similar regulations with which we or our lessees may be required to comply, and that may subject us or them to liability in the form of fines or damages. In all events, our lessees’ operations, the existing condition of land when we buy it, operations in the vicinity of our properties or activities of unrelated third parties could all affect our properties in ways that lead to costs being imposed on us.

Any material expenditures, fines, damages or forced changes to our business or strategy resulting from any of the above could adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations.

Our quarterly results may fluctuate.

We could experience fluctuations in our quarterly operating results due to a number of factors, including variations in the returns on our current and future investments, the interest rates payable on our debt, the level of our expenses, the levels and timing of the recognition of our realized and unrealized gains and losses including potential impairments of assets and sales at valuations which are below the carrying value on our books, the degree to which we encounter competition in our markets and other business, market and general economic conditions. Consequently, our results of operations for any current or historical period should not be relied upon as being indicative of performance in any future period.

We may not be able to sell our real property assets when we desire. In particular, in order to maintain our status as a REIT, we may be forced to borrow funds or sell assets during unfavorable market conditions.

Investments in real property are relatively illiquid compared to other investments. Accordingly, we may not be able to sell real property assets when we desire or at prices acceptable to us. This could substantially reduce the funds available for satisfying our obligations, including any debt or preferred share obligations, and for distributions to our common shareholders.

As a REIT, we must distribute at least 90% of our annual REIT taxable income, subject to certain adjustments, such as net operating losses, to our shareholders. To the extent that we satisfy the REIT distribution requirement but distribute less than 100% of our taxable income, we will be subject to federal corporate income tax on our undistributed taxable income. In addition, we will be subject to a 4% nondeductible excise tax if the actual amount that we pay to our shareholders in a calendar year is less than a minimum amount specified under federal tax laws. In addition to applicable federal taxation, we may be subject to state taxation.

From time to time, we may have taxable income greater than our cash flow available for distribution to our shareholders (for example, due to substantial non-deductible cash outlays, such as capital expenditures or principal payments on debt). If we did not have other funds available in these situations, we could be required to borrow funds, sell investments at disadvantageous prices or find alternative sources of funds in order to make distributions sufficient to enable us to pay out enough of our taxable income to satisfy the REIT distribution requirement and avoid income and excise taxes in a particular year. Any of these outcomes could increase our operating costs and diminish our available cash flows or ability to grow.

If an investment that was initially believed to be a real property asset is later deemed not to have been a real property asset at the time of investment, we could lose our status as a REIT or be precluded from investing according to our current business plan.

Power REIT must meet income and asset tests to qualify as a REIT. If an investment that was originally believed to be a real asset is later deemed not to have been a real asset at the time of investment, our status as a REIT could be jeopardized or we could be precluded from investing according to our current business plan, either of which would have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. Further, we may not seek a private letter ruling from the Internal Revenue Service with respect to some or all of our infrastructure investments. The lack of such private letter rulings may increase the risk that an investment believed to be a real asset could later be deemed not to be a real asset. In the event that an investment is deemed to not be a real asset, we may be required to dispose of such investment, which could have a material adverse effect on us, because even if we were successful in finding a buyer, we might have difficulty finding a buyer on favorable terms or in a sufficient time frame.

Our failure to remain qualified as a REIT would subject us to U.S. federal income tax and applicable state and local taxes, which would reduce the amount of cash available for distribution to our stockholders and have significant adverse consequences on the market price of our common shares.

We elected to be taxed as a REIT under Sections 856 through 860 of the Code commencing with our taxable year ended December 31, 2019. We believe that we have been organized and operated in such a manner as to remain qualified for taxation as a REIT under the Code for such taxable year and all subsequent taxable years to date and intend to continue to operate in such a manner in the future. We have not requested and do not intend to request a ruling from the Internal Revenue Service (the “Service”) that we remain qualified as a REIT, and the statements in this Annual Report on Form 10-K are not binding on the Service or any court. Qualification as a REIT for federal income tax purposes is governed by highly technical and complex provisions of the Code, for which there are only limited judicial or administrative interpretations. Qualification as a REIT for federal income tax purposes is governed by highly technical and complex provisions of the Internal Revenue Code, for which there are only limited judicial or administrative interpretations. Our qualification as a REIT also depends on various facts and circumstances that are not entirely within our control. In addition, legislation, new regulations, administrative interpretations and court decisions might all change the tax laws with respect to the requirements for qualification as a REIT or the federal income tax consequences of qualification as a REIT. Accordingly, we cannot provide assurance that we will remain qualified as a REIT.

To remain qualified as a REIT, we must meet, on an ongoing basis, various tests regarding the nature and diversification of our assets and our income, the ownership of our outstanding stock, and the amount of our distributions to stockholders. Our ability to satisfy these asset tests depends upon the characterization and fair market values of our assets, some of which are not susceptible to a precise determination, and for which we will not obtain independent appraisals. Our compliance with the REIT income and quarterly asset requirements also depends upon our ability to manage successfully the composition of our income and assets on an ongoing basis. Moreover, new legislation, court decisions or administrative guidance, in each case possibly with retroactive effect, may make it more difficult or impossible for us to remain qualified as a REIT. Thus, while we intend to operate in a manner to remain qualified as a REIT, in view of the highly complex nature of the rules governing REITs, the ongoing importance of factual determinations, and the possibility of future changes in our circumstances, we cannot provide assurance that we will so qualify for any particular year. These considerations also might restrict the types of income we can realize, or assets that we can acquire in the future.

If we fail to remain qualified as a REIT in any taxable year, and we do not qualify for certain statutory relief provisions, we would be required to pay U.S. federal income tax on our taxable income at regular corporate rates (and possibly increased state and local taxes). We will not be able to deduct distributions to our stockholders in any year in which we fail to qualify, nor will we be required to make distributions to our stockholders. In such a case, we might need to borrow money, sell assets, or reduce or even cease making distributions in order to pay our taxes. Our payment of income tax would reduce significantly the amount of cash available for distribution to our stockholders. If we fail to remain qualified as a REIT, all distributions to stockholders, to the extent of current and accumulated earnings and profits, will be taxable to the stockholders as dividend income (which may be subject to tax at preferential rates) and corporate distributions may be eligible for the dividends received deduction if they satisfy the relevant provisions of the Code. Furthermore, if we fail to remain qualified as a REIT, we no longer would be required to distribute substantially all of our net taxable income to our stockholders. In addition, unless we were eligible for certain statutory relief provisions, we could not re-elect to qualify as a REIT until the fifth calendar year following the year in which we failed to qualify and thus our cash available for distribution to our shareholders would be reduced in each of those years, unless we were entitled to relief under relevant statutory provisions. In addition, we would be disqualified from treatment as a REIT for the four taxable years following the year during which qualification was lost and thus our cash available for distribution to our shareholders would be reduced in each of those years, unless we were entitled to relief under relevant statutory provisions. We might not be entitled to the statutory relief described in this paragraph in all circumstances. Failure to qualify as a REIT could result in additional expenses or additional adverse consequences, which may include the forced liquidation of some or all of our investments.

Although we currently intend to operate in a manner designed to allow us to continue to qualify as a REIT, future economic, market, legal, tax or other considerations might cause us to lose our REIT status, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, prospects, financial condition and results of operations, and could adversely affect our ability to successfully implement our business strategy and pay dividends.

If we are deemed to be subject to Section 280E of the Code because of the business activities of our tenants, the resulting disallowance of tax deductions could cause us to incur U.S. federal income tax and jeopardize our REIT status.

Section 280E of the Code provides that, with respect to any taxpayer, no deduction or credit is allowed for expenses incurred during a taxable year “in carrying on any trade or business if such trade or business (or the activities which comprise such trade or business) consists of trafficking in controlled substances (within the meaning of Schedule I and II of the Controlled Substance Act) which is prohibited by federal law or the law of any State in which such trade or business is conducted.” Because cannabis is a Schedule I controlled substance under the CSA, Section 280E of the Code by its terms applies to the purchase and sale of medical-use and adult-use cannabis products. Although we will not be engaged in the purchase, sale, growth, cultivation, harvesting, or processing of medical-use and adult-use cannabis products, we lease properties to tenants who will engage in such activities, and therefore our tenants likely will be subject to Section 280E of the Code. If the Service were to take the position that, through our rental agreements with our state-licensed cannabis tenants, we are primarily or vicariously liable under federal law for “trafficking” a Schedule 1 substance (cannabis) under Section 280E of the Code or for any other violations of the CSA, the Service may seek to apply the provisions of Section 280E of the Code to our company and disallow certain tax deductions, including for employee salaries, depreciation or interest expense. If such tax deductions are disallowed, it might impact our ability to meet the distribution requirements applicable to REITs under the Code, which could cause us to incur U.S. federal income tax and fail to remain qualified as a REIT. Because we are not engaged in the purchase or sale of a controlled substance, we do not believe that we will be subject to the disallowance provisions of Section 280E of the Code, and neither we nor our tax advisors are aware of any tax court cases or guidance from the Service in which a taxpayer not engaged in the purchase or sale of a controlled substance was disallowed deductions under Section 280E of the Code. However, there is no assurance that the Service will not take such a position either currently or in the future.

Legislative, regulatory or administrative changes could adversely affect us or our stockholders.

At any time, the U.S. federal income tax laws or Treasury Regulations governing REITs or the administrative interpretations of those laws or regulations may be changed, possibly with retroactive effect, and may adversely affect us and our stockholders. We cannot predict if or when any new U.S. federal income tax law, regulation or administrative interpretation, or any amendment to any existing U.S. federal income tax law, regulation or administrative interpretation, will be adopted, promulgated or become effective or whether any such law, regulation or interpretation may take effect retroactively.

In addition, several proposals have been made that would make substantial changes to the federal income tax laws generally. We cannot predict whether any of these proposed changes will become law. We cannot predict the long-term effect of any recent or future tax law changes on REITs and their stockholders. Prospective investors are urged to consult with their tax advisors regarding the effect of potential changes to the federal tax laws on an investment in our stock.

If we were deemed to be an investment company under the Investment Company Act of 1940, applicable restrictions could make it impractical for us to continue our business as contemplated and could have a material adverse effect on the price of our securities.

A company such as ours would be considered an investment company under the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended (the “1940 Act”), if, among other things, it owned investment securities (including minority ownership interests in subsidiaries or other entities) that have an aggregate value exceeding 40% of the value of its total assets on an unconsolidated basis, or it failed to qualify under the exemption from investment company status available to companies primarily engaged in the business of purchasing or otherwise acquiring mortgages and other liens on and interests in real estate.

We do not believe that we are, or are likely to become, an investment company under the 1940 Act. Nevertheless, if we were deemed to be an investment company, restrictions imposed by the 1940 Act, including limitations on our capital structure, could make it impractical for us to continue our business as contemplated and could have a material adverse effect on our operations and the price of our common shares.

Net leases may not result in fair market lease rates over time.

We expect a portion of our future income to come from net leases, whereby the lessee is responsible for all the costs, insurance and taxes of a property, including maintenance. Net leases typically have longer lease terms and, thus, there is an increased risk that if market rental rates increase in future years, the rates under our net leases will be less than fair market rental rates during those years. As a result, our income and distributions could be lower than they would otherwise be if we did not enter into net leases. When appropriate, we will seek to include a clause in each lease that provides increases in rent over the term of the lease, but there can be no assurance that we will be successful in securing such a clause. Some of our investments may include “percentage of gross revenue” lease payments, which may result in positive or negative outcomes depending on the performance of the acquired asset.

If a sale-leaseback transaction is recharacterized in a lessee’s bankruptcy proceeding, our financial condition could be adversely affected.

In certain cases, we intend to enter into sale-leaseback transactions, whereby we would purchase a property and then simultaneously lease the same property back to the seller. In the event of the bankruptcy of a lessee company, a transaction structured as a sale-leaseback may be recharacterized as either a financing or a joint venture, either of which outcomes could adversely affect our business. If the sale-leaseback were recharacterized as a financing, we might not be considered the owner of the property, and as a result would have the status of a creditor in relation to the lessee company. In that event, we would no longer have the right to sell or encumber our ownership interest in the property. Instead, we would have a claim against the lessee company for the amounts owed under the lease, with the claim arguably secured by the property, and the lessee company/debtor might have the ability to restructure the terms, interest rate and amortization schedule of its outstanding balance. If new terms were confirmed by the bankruptcy court, we could be bound by them, and prevented from foreclosing on the property. If the sale-leaseback were recharacterized as a joint venture, we and the lessee company could be treated as co-venturers with regard to the property. As a result, we could be held liable, under some circumstances, for debts incurred by the lessee company relating to the property. Either of these outcomes could adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations.

Provisions of the Maryland General Corporation Law and our Declaration of Trust and Bylaws could deter takeover attempts and have an adverse impact on the price of our common shares.

The Maryland General Corporation Law and our Declaration of Trust and Bylaws contain provisions that may have the effect of discouraging, delaying or making difficult a change in control of Power REIT. The business combination provisions of Maryland law (if our Board of Trustees decides to make them applicable to us), the control share acquisition provisions of Maryland law (if the applicable provisions in our Bylaws are rescinded), the limitations on removal of Trustees, the restrictions on the acquisition of our common shares, the power to issue additional shares and the advance notice provisions of our Bylaws could have the effect of delaying, deterring or preventing a transaction or a change in control that might involve a premium price for holders of the common shares or might otherwise be in their best interests.

In order to assist us in complying with limitations on the concentration of ownership of REIT stock imposed by the Code, among other purposes, our charter provides that no natural person or entity may, directly or indirectly, beneficially or constructively own more than 9.9% (in value or number of shares, whichever is more restrictive) of the aggregate amount of our outstanding shares of beneficial interest. In addition, our Board of Trustees may, without stockholder action, authorize the issuance of shares of stock in one or more classes or series, including preferred stock. Our Board of Trustees may, without stockholder action, amend our charter to increase the number of shares of stock of any class or series that we have authority to issue. The existence of these provisions, among others, may have a negative impact on the price of our common shares and may discourage third party bids for ownership of our Trust. These provisions may prevent any premiums being offered to holders of common shares.

Our business and operations would suffer in the event of system failures.

Our computer systems are vulnerable to damage from computer viruses, unauthorized access, natural disasters (including hurricanes), terrorism, war and telecommunication and electrical failures. If such an event were to occur and cause interruptions in our operations, it could result in a material disruption of our business. To the extent that any disruption or security breach were to result in a loss of or damage to our data or applications, or inappropriate disclosure of personal, confidential or proprietary information, we could incur liability and our business could be adversely affected.

We are increasingly dependent on information technology, and our systems and infrastructure face certain risks, including cybersecurity and data leakage risks.

Significant disruptions to our information technology systems or breaches of information security could adversely affect our business. The size and complexity of our information technology systems, and those of our third-party vendors with whom we contract, make such systems potentially vulnerable to service interruptions and security breaches from inadvertent or intentional actions by our employees, partners or vendors, from attacks by malicious third parties, or from intentional or accidental physical damage to our systems infrastructure maintained by us or by third parties. A breach of our security measures or the accidental loss, inadvertent disclosure, unapproved dissemination, misappropriation or misuse of proprietary information, or other confidential information, whether as a result of theft, hacking, fraud, trickery or other forms of deception, or for any other reason, could adversely affect our business or financial condition. Further, any such interruption, security breach, loss or disclosure of confidential information, could result in financial, legal, business, and reputational harm to us and could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial position, results of operations or cash flow.

We have identified material weaknesses in our internal controls, and we cannot provide assurances that these material weaknesses will be effectively remediated or that additional weaknesses will not occur in the future.

Our management is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over our financial reporting, as defined in Rule 13a- 15(f) under the Exchange Act. During the quarter ended September 30, 2024, we identified a material weakness in our controls relating to accounting for complex transactions. Specifically, shares of our Series A Preferred Stock were historically classified as mezzanine equity instead of being classified as equity which resulted in re-stating our financial statements for the quarter ended June 30, 2024. The weakness has not yet been remediated.

While we have hired outside consultants to aid in our accounting for complex transactions and have taken remedial action to address the material weakness in our internal controls, we cannot provide any assurance that such remedial measures, or any other remedial measures we take, will be effective. In addition, a material weakness will not be considered remediated until the applicable controls operate for a sufficient period of time and management has concluded, through testing, that these controls are designed and operate effectively. Management plans to fully remediate the identified material weakness in internal controls, however, there can be no assurance that the deficiencies will be remediated in the near future or that the internal control over financial reporting, as modified, will enable us to identify or avoid material weaknesses in our internal controls in the future. In addition, due to our small number of employees, there can be no assurance that another weakness will not occur.

As a result of our failure to maintain an effective system of internal control over financial reporting, we may not be able to accurately report our financial results or prevent fraud. As a result, security holders could lose confidence in our financial and other public reporting, which would harm our business and the trading price of our common shares.

Effective internal control over financial reporting is necessary for us to provide reliable financial reports and, together with adequate disclosure controls and procedures, is designed to prevent fraud. Our failure to maintain an effective system of internal controls, and any failure by us to implement required new or improved internal controls or difficulties encountered in their implementation, could cause us to fail to meet our reporting obligations. In addition, any testing by us, as and when required, conducted in connection with Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, or Section 404, or any subsequent testing by our independent registered public accounting firm, as and when required, may reveal deficiencies in our internal control over financial reporting that are deemed to be material weaknesses or that may require prospective or retroactive changes to our financial statements or identify other areas for further attention or improvement. As a growing company, implementing and maintaining effective controls may require more resources, and we may encounter internal control integration difficulties. Our failure to maintain effective internal controls over financial reporting, may result in us not being able to accurately report our financial results, detect or prevent fraud, or file our periodic reports in a timely manner, which may, among other adverse consequences, cause investors to lose confidence in our reported financial information and lead to a decline in the trading price of our common shares.

Risks Related to our Investment Strategy

Each property in our portfolio could be considered a special purpose use asset which may impact market value and the ability to lease to generate income.

Our properties span across the special purposes of solar power production, railroad, and CEA facilities in the form of greenhouses. As special purpose assets they cannot be easily pivoted to alternative uses and tend to support industry-specific tenants (i.e. greenhouse with a cultivator). This specialization can work against the marketability of the asset and in the case that the tenant or the under-lying industry experiences default or downturn, the value of the asset could fall accordingly. We can provide no assurance that the industries utilizing our assets will succeed and if a tenant fails there is no visibility as to when we would find a replacement tenant or if there are any potential solutions in the broader market.

Our real estate investments include greenhouse properties suitable for the cultivation of cannabis, and a decrease in demand for such facilities has and could continue to materially and adversely affect our business. These properties may be difficult to sell or re-lease upon tenant defaults or lease terminations, either of which could adversely affect our business.

Our portfolio of properties is concentrated in greenhouse properties suitable for the cultivation of cannabis used therefore, we are subject to risks inherent in investments heavily in a single industry. A decrease in the demand for cannabis cultivation, processing and dispensary facilities would have a greater adverse effect on our rental revenues than if we owned a more diversified real estate portfolio. Demand for cannabis cultivation and processing facilities has been and could be adversely affected by changes in state or local laws or any change in the federal government’s current enforcement posture with respect to state-licensed cannabis operations, among others. To the extent that any of these conditions occur, they are likely to affect demand and market rents for cannabis cultivation and processing and dispensary facilities, which could materially and adversely affect our business.

In addition, if we are forced to sell or re-lease a property, we may have difficulty finding qualified purchasers who are willing to buy the property or tenants who are willing to lease the property on terms that we expect, or at all. As our tenants and properties are concentrated in the regulated cannabis industry, a shift in property preferences by regulated cannabis operators, including but not limited to changing preferences regarding location and types of improvements, could have a significant negative impact on the desirability of our properties to prospective tenants when we need to re-lease them, in addition to other challenges, such as obtaining the necessary state and local authorizations for a new tenant to commence operations at the property. These and other limitations may affect our ability to sell or re-lease properties, which may materially and adversely affect our business.

Our focus on non-traditional real estate asset classes including CEA, alternative energy and transportation infrastructure sectors will subject us to more risks than if we were broadly diversified to include other asset classes.

Because we specifically focus on non-traditional real estate assets, investments in our securities may present more risks than if we were broadly diversified over numerous sectors of the economy. For example, a downturn in the U.S. CEA, alternative energy or transportation infrastructure sectors would have a larger impact on us than on a trust that does not concentrate in one sector of the economy. Factors that may adversely affect our investments include, but are not limited to, changes in supply and demand for infrastructure consumption, prices of national and global commodities, government regulation, world and regional events and general economic conditions.

Renewable energy resources are complex, and our investments in them rely on long-term projections of resource and equipment availability and capital and operating costs; if our or our lessees’ projections are incorrect, we may suffer losses.

Although the projection of renewable energy resource availability has been analyzed for decades across different geographies, technologies and topologies, long-term projections of renewable resource availability at a particular site, the availability of generating equipment and the operating costs of harvesting such renewable energy are subject to various uncertainties and in many cases must rely on estimates at best. If any such projections are materially incorrect, our lessees could suffer financial losses, which could adversely affect our investments. In addition, investments based on a percentage of gross revenue could under-perform our investment projections, leading to adverse effects on our financial condition and results of operations.

Infrastructure assets may be subject to the risk of fluctuations in commodity prices and in the supply of and demand for infrastructure consumption.

The operations and financial performance of companies in the infrastructure sector may be directly or indirectly affected by commodity prices and fluctuations in infrastructure supply and demand. Commodity prices and infrastructure demand fluctuate for several reasons, including changes in market and economic conditions, the impact of weather on demand or supply, levels of domestic production and imported commodities, energy conservation, domestic and foreign governmental regulation and taxation and the availability of local, intrastate and interstate transportation systems. Fluctuations in commodity prices may increase costs for consumers of energy-related infrastructure assets and therefore reduce demand for such infrastructure. Further, extreme price fluctuation upwards or downwards could lead to the development of alternatives to existing energy-related infrastructure and could impair the value of our investments.

Volatility in commodity prices or in the supply of and demand for infrastructure assets may make it more difficult for companies in the infrastructure sector to raise capital to the extent the market perceives that their performance may be tied directly or indirectly to commodity prices. Historically, commodity prices have been cyclical and have exhibited significant volatility. Should infrastructure companies experience variations in supply and demand, the resulting decline in operating or financial performance could adversely affect the value or quality of our assets.

Infrastructure investments are subject to obsolescence risks.

Infrastructure assets are subject to obsolescence risks that could occur as a result of changing supply and demand, new types of construction, changing demographics, changing weather patterns and new technologies. In any such event, there might be few alternative uses for our investments, and our investments might drop in value.

Renewable energy investments may be adversely affected by variations in weather patterns.

Renewable energy investments may be adversely affected by variations in weather patterns, including shifting wind or solar resources and including variations brought about by climate changes, which would cause earnings volatility for our lessees or borrowers and which could affect their ability to make lease or other contractual payments to us. Lease payments that are structured as a percentage of gross revenue typically fluctuate from period to period. Although we believe these fluctuations tend to average out over time, to the extent that our projections are incorrect because weather patterns change significantly, our financial condition and results of operations could be adversely affected.

Investments in renewable energy may be dependent on equipment or manufacturers that have limited operating histories or financial or other challenges.

Although most wind, solar and other renewable energy projects use technologies that are well understood by the market, many technologies are undergoing rapid changes and improvements and many have not been tested in operating environments for the expected durations of our investments. Some manufacturers are new or relatively new and may not have the financial ability to support their extended warranties. As a result, if the future performance of equipment that is a basis for a lessee’s revenues is lower than projected, such a lessee may have difficulty making its lease payments to us and our business could suffer.

Our portfolio of marketable securities, is subject to market, interest and credit risk that may reduce its value.

We have investments in a portfolio of marketable securities. As of December 31, 2025, the Trust owned common shares, preferred and warrants of a publicly traded REIT. The fair market value of our publicly traded REIT securities was $86,537, based on the December 31, 2025 closing prices. Changes in the value of our portfolio of marketable securities could adversely affect our earnings. In particular, the value of our investments may decline due to increases in interest rates, downgrades of the securities included in our portfolio, instability in the global financial markets that reduces the liquidity of securities included in our portfolio, declines in the value of assets underlying the securities included in our portfolio and other factors. In addition, the COVID-19 pandemic, geopolitical instability and rising inflation have and may continue to adversely affect the financial markets. Each of these events may cause us to record charges to reduce the carrying value of our investment portfolio or sell investments for less than our acquisition cost.

Risks Related to our Securities

There is a 9.9% limit on the amount of our equity securities that any one person or entity may own.

In order to assist us in complying with limitations on the concentration of ownership of REIT stock imposed by the Code, among other purposes, our charter provides that no natural person or entity may, directly or indirectly, beneficially or constructively own more than 9.9% (in value or number of shares, whichever is more restrictive) of the aggregate amount of our outstanding shares of beneficial interest. If a person were found to own more than this amount, whether as a result of intentionally purchasing our securities, developments outside such person’s control or otherwise – for example, as a result of changes in the Trust’s capital structure, the inheritance of securities, or otherwise – then, among other things, the transfers leading to the violation of the 9.9% limit would be void and the Board of Trustees would be authorized to take such actions as it deems advisable and/or as authorized by the Declaration of Trust to ensure the beneficial ownership limit is not exceeded. If a person were found to own more than this amount, whether as a result of intentionally purchasing our securities, developments outside such person’s control or otherwise – for example, as a result of changes in the Company’s capital structure, the inheritance of securities, or otherwise – then, among other things, the transfers leading to the violation of the 9.9% limit would be void and the Board of Trustees would be authorized to take such actions as it deemed advisable to insure the undoing of the transfers. This ownership limit could discourage investors from investing in the Trust.

We cannot assure you that our common shares and our Series A Preferred Stock will remain listed on the NYSE American.

The Trust’s common shares and/or its Series A Preferred Stock could be subject to delisting by, the NYSE American, based on a number of factors, including a failure by us to continue to qualify as a REIT, a failure to meet the NYSE American ongoing listing requirements, including those relating to the number of shareholders, the price of the Trust’s securities, the amount of equity, and the amount and composition of the Trust’s assets, changes in NYSE American ongoing listing requirements and other factors.

To our knowledge, the NYSE American has not approved for listing any U.S.-based REITs engaged in the ownership of cannabis-related properties, other than Innovative Industrial Properties, Inc., a cannabis-focused real estate investment trust listed in late 2016 just prior to the nomination of former Attorney General Sessions. (NYSE:IIPR), a cannabis-focused real estate investment trust listed in late 2016 just prior to the nomination of former Attorney General Sessions. Although we currently believe we meet the maintenance listing standards of the NYSE American, we cannot assure you that we will continue to meet those standards, or that the NYSE American will not seek to delist our common shares or Series A Preferred Stock as a result of our entry into lease agreements with licensed U.S. cannabis cultivators or other potential violations of listing requirements.

Additionally, NYSE American has proposed amendments to its continued listing standards that would, if approved and implemented, modify or tighten existing requirements relating to minimum trading price and minimum stockholders’ equity. The proposed rule change to Section 1003(f)(v) of the NYSE American Company Guide (the “Company Guide”) would provide for the immediate suspension of trading and commencement of delisting proceedings by the exchange if a listed security’s closing price per share is less than $0.25 on any single trading day, without providing advance notice to the issuer or an opportunity to cure. NYSE American has also proposed a new continued-listing standard that would require listed issuers to maintain a minimum market capitalization of at least $5 million, measured over a 30-consecutive-trading-day period. This requirement does not currently exist in the Company Guide and would be added to Section 1003 if approved by the SEC. Under the proposed rule, NYSE American would have explicit authority to commence delisting proceedings if a listed company’s market capitalization falls below the $5 million threshold for the specified period. There can be no assurance that we would be able to satisfy such requirements on a sustained basis, particularly given market volatility, fluctuations in our stock price, operating losses, or factors beyond our control.

If our common shares or Series A Preferred Stock are delisted from the NYSE American, then our common shares and our Series A Preferred Stock will trade, if at all, only on the over-the-counter market, such as the OTCQB or OTCQX trading platforms, and then only if one or more registered broker-dealer market makers comply with quotation requirements. Any potential delisting of our common shares from the NYSE American could, among other things, depress our share price, substantially limit liquidity of our common shares and materially adversely affect our ability to raise capital on terms acceptable to us, or at all. Any potential delisting of our common shares from the NYSE could, among other things, depress our share price, substantially limit liquidity of our common shares and materially adversely affect our ability to raise capital on terms acceptable to us, or at all.

Low trading volumes in the Trust’s listed securities may adversely affect holders’ ability to resell their securities at prices that are attractive, or at all.

Power REIT’s common shares are traded on the NYSE American under the ticker “PW”. The average daily trading volume of Power REIT’s common shares is less than that of the listed securities of many other companies, including larger companies. During the 12 months ended December 31, 2025, the average daily trading volume for the Trust’s common shares was approximately 225,761 shares. During the 12 months ended December 31, 2019, the average daily trading volume for the Company’s common shares was approximately 14,373 shares. Power REIT’s Series A Preferred Stock is traded on the NYSE American under the ticker “PW PRA”. The Series A Preferred Stock has been listed since March 18, 2014. Because the Series A Preferred Stock has no maturity date, investors seeking liquidity may be limited to selling their shares of Series A Preferred Stock in the secondary market. In part due to the relatively small trading volume of the Trust’s listed securities, any material sales of such securities by any person may place significant downward pressure on the market price of the Trust’s listed securities. In part due to the relatively small trading volume of the Company’s listed securities, any material sales of such securities by any person may place significant downward pressure on the market price of the Company’s listed securities. In general, as a result of low trading volumes, it may be difficult for holders of the Trust’s listed securities to sell their securities at prices they find attractive, or at all. In general, as a result of low trading volumes, it may be difficult for holders of the Company’s listed securities to sell their securities at prices they find attractive, or at all.

Our stock price has fluctuated in the past, has recently been volatile and may be volatile in the future, and as a result, investors in our common shares could incur substantial losses.

Our stock price has fluctuated in the past, has recently been volatile and may be volatile in the future. On November 20, 2025, the reported low sale price of our common shares was $.60 and on August 14, 2025, the reported high sales price was $1.70. We may incur rapid and substantial decreases in our stock price in the foreseeable future that are unrelated to our operating performance or prospects. In addition, sales of substantial amounts of our common shares, or the perception that such sales might occur, could adversely affect prevailing market prices of our common shares and our stock price may decline substantially in a short period of time. As a result of this volatility, investors may experience losses on their investment in our common shares. The market price for our common shares may be influenced by many factors, including the following:

These broad market and industry factors may seriously harm the market price of our common shares, regardless of our operating performance. Since the stock price of our common shares has fluctuated in the past, has been recently volatile and may be volatile in the future, investors in our common shares could incur substantial losses. In the past, following periods of volatility in the market, securities class-action litigation has often been instituted against companies. Such litigation, if instituted against us, could result in substantial costs and diversion of management’s attention and resources, which could materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects. There can be no guarantee that our stock price will remain at current prices or that future sales of our common shares will not be at prices lower than those sold to investors.

Additionally, recently, securities of certain companies have experienced significant and extreme volatility in stock price due short sellers of common shares, known as a “short squeeze.” These short squeezes have caused extreme volatility in those companies and in the market and have led to the price per share of those companies to trade at a significantly inflated rate that is disconnected from the underlying value of such companies. Many investors who have purchased shares in those companies at an inflated rate face the risk of losing a significant portion of their original investment as the price per share has declined steadily as interest in those stocks have abated. While we have no reason to believe our shares would be the target of a short squeeze, there can be no assurance that we won’t be in the future, and you may lose a significant portion or all of your investment if you purchase our shares at a rate that is significantly disconnected from our underlying value.

Our ability to issue preferred stock in the future could adversely affect the rights of existing holders of our equity securities.

Our charter permits our Board of Trustees to increase the number of authorized shares of our capital stock without the approval of holders of our common shares or Series A Preferred Stock. In addition, our charter permits our Board of Trustees to reclassify any or all of our unissued authorized shares as shares of preferred stock in one or more new series on terms determinable by our Board of Trustees, without the approval of holders of our common shares or Series A Preferred Stock. Future reclassifications or issuances by us of preferred stock, whether Series A Preferred Stock or some new series of preferred stock, could effectively diminish our ability to pay dividends or other distributions to existing equity security holders, including distributions upon our liquidation, dissolution or winding up.

The issuance of additional equity securities may dilute existing equity holders.

The issuance of additional equity securities may result in the dilution of existing equity securities holders. Although the Trust expects to deploy additional equity capital principally for the purpose of seeking to make accretive transactions, and in such cases seeks to not dilute the economic value of equity securities held by existing holders, such additional issuances may dilute existing equity securities holders’ percentage ownership of the Trust, and the percentage of voting power they hold, depending on the terms of the newly issued equity securities. Although the Company expects to deploy additional equity capital principally for the purpose of seeking to make accretive transactions, and in such cases seeks to not dilute the economic value of equity securities held by existing holders, such additional issuances may dilute existing equity securities holders’ percentage ownership of the Company, and the percentage of voting power they hold, depending on the terms of the newly issued equity securities.

Our Series A Preferred Stock has not been rated and is junior to our existing and future debt, and the interests of holders of Series A Preferred Stock could be diluted by the issuance of additional parity-preferred securities and by other transactions.

Our Series A Preferred Stock has not been rated by any nationally recognized statistical rating organization, which may negatively affect its market value and a holder’s ability to sell it. It is possible that one or more rating agencies might independently determine to issue such a rating and that such a rating, if issued, could adversely affect the market price of our Series A Preferred Stock. In addition, we may elect in the future to obtain a rating of our Series A Preferred Stock, which could adversely affect its market price. Ratings reflect only the views of the rating agency or agencies issuing the ratings, and they could be revised downward or withdrawn entirely at the discretion of the issuing rating agency if in its judgment circumstances so warrant. Any such downward revision or withdrawal of a rating could have an adverse effect on the market price of our Series A Preferred Stock.

The payment of amounts due on the Series A Preferred Stock will be junior in payment preference to all of our existing and future debt and any securities we may issue in the future that have rights or preferences senior to those of the Series A Preferred Stock. We may issue additional shares of Series A Preferred Stock or additional shares of preferred stock in the future which are on a parity with (or, upon the affirmative vote or consent of the holders of two-thirds of the outstanding shares of Series A Preferred Stock, senior to) the Series A Preferred Stock with respect to the payment of dividends and the distribution of assets upon liquidation, dissolution or winding up. Additional issuance of preferred securities or other transactions could reduce the pro-rata assets available for distribution upon liquidation and you may not receive your full liquidation preference if there are not sufficient assets. In addition, issuance of additional preferred securities or other transactions could dilute your voting rights with respect to certain matters that require votes or the consent of holders of our Series A Preferred Stock.

Holders of Series A Preferred Stock have limited voting rights.

The voting rights of a holder of Series A Preferred Stock are limited. Our common shares are the only class of our securities carrying full voting rights. Our common stock is the only class of our securities carrying full voting rights. Voting rights for holders of Series A Preferred Stock exist only with respect to amendments to our charter (whether by merger, consolidation or otherwise) that materially and adversely affect the terms of the Series A Preferred Stock, the authorization or issuance of classes or series of equity securities that are senior to the Series A Preferred Stock and, if we fail to pay dividends on the Series A Preferred Stock for six or more quarterly periods (whether or not consecutive), the election of additional trustees. To date, we have failed to pay the dividends owed to the holders of shares of Series A Preferred Stock and, therefore, the holders of shares of Series A Preferred Stock are entitled to elect two trustees to our Board of Trustees, which to date they have not done as required. Holders would not, however, have any voting rights if we amend, alter or repeal the provisions of our charter or the terms of the Series A Preferred Stock in connection with a merger, consolidation, transfer or conveyance of all or substantially all of our assets or otherwise, so long as the Series A Preferred Stock remains outstanding and its terms remain materially unchanged or holders receive stock of the successor entity with substantially identical rights, taking into account that, upon the occurrence of an event described in this sentence, we may not be the surviving entity. Furthermore, if holders receive the greater of the full trading price of the Series A Preferred Stock on the last date prior to the first public announcement of an event described in the preceding sentence, or the $25.00 liquidation preference per share of Series A Preferred Stock plus accrued and unpaid dividends (whether or not declared) to, but not including, the date of such event, pursuant to the occurrence of any of the events described in the preceding sentence, then holders will not have any voting rights with respect to the events described in the preceding sentence.

Dividends on our Series A Preferred Stock can be suspended and not paid on a current basis.

The Trust is not obligated to distribute a dividend on its Series A Preferred Stock on a current basis. During 2025, the Trust did not declare dividends on Power REIT’s Series A Preferred Stock. Dividends not declared accumulate and are added to the liquidation preference.

We may issue additional Series A Preferred Stock at a discount to liquidation value or at a discount to the issuance value of shares of Series A Preferred Stock already issued.

We may offer additional Series A Preferred Stock at prices or yields that represent a discount to liquidation value, or that represent a discount to the price paid for or the yield applicable to shares of Series A Preferred Stock previously issued and sold. Such sales could adversely affect the market price of the Series A Preferred Stock.

The change of control conversion and delisting conversion features of our Series A Preferred Stock may not adequately compensate a holder of such securities upon a Change of Control or Delisting Event (as such terms as defined in regard to our Series A Preferred Stock), and the change of control conversion, delisting conversion and redemption features of our Series A Preferred Stock may make it more difficult for a party to take over our trust or may discourage a party from taking over our trust.

Upon a Change of Control or Delisting Event, holders of our Series A Preferred Stock will have the right (subject to our special optional redemption rights) to convert all or part of their shares of Series A Preferred Stock into common shares (or equivalent value of alternative consideration). If our common share price were less than $5.00 subject to adjustment, holders will receive a maximum of 5 of our common shares per share of Series A Preferred Stock, which may result in a holder receiving value that is less than the liquidation preference of the Series A Preferred Stock. In addition, the foregoing features of our Series A Preferred Stock may have the effect of inhibiting a third party from making an acquisition proposal for our trust or of delaying, deferring or preventing a change in control of our trust under circumstances that otherwise could provide the holders of our common shares and Series A Preferred Stock with the opportunity to realize a premium over the then current market prices of those securities, or that holders may otherwise believe is in their best interests. In addition, the foregoing features of our Series A Preferred Stock may have the effect of inhibiting a third party from making an acquisition proposal for our company or of delaying, deferring or preventing a change in control of our company under circumstances that otherwise could provide the holders of shares of our common stock and Series A Preferred Stock with the opportunity to realize a premium over the then current market prices of those securities, or that holders may otherwise believe is in their best interests.

Ownership limitations may restrict change in control or business combination opportunities in which our stockholders might receive a premium for their shares.

To qualify as a REIT under the Code, shares of our stock must be owned by 100 or more persons during at least 335 days of a taxable year of 12 months (other than the first year for which an election to be a REIT has been made) or during a proportionate part of a shorter taxable year. Also, not more than 50% of the value of the outstanding shares of our stock may be owned, directly or indirectly, by five or fewer individuals (as defined in the Code to include certain entities) during the last half of a taxable year (other than the first year for which an election to be a REIT has been made). In order for us to remain qualified as a REIT under the Code, the relevant sections of our charter provide that, subject to certain exceptions, no person or entity may own, or be deemed to own, by virtue of the applicable constructive ownership provisions of the Code, more than 9.9% (in value or number of shares, whichever is more restrictive) of the aggregate of our outstanding shares of beneficial interest. In order to assist us in complying with limitations on the concentration of ownership of REIT stock imposed by the Internal Revenue Code, among other purposes, our charter provides that no natural person or entity may, directly or indirectly, beneficially or constructively own more than 9.9% (in value or number of shares, whichever is more restrictive) of the aggregate amount of our outstanding shares of all classes. These ownership limits and other restrictions could have the effect of discouraging a takeover or other transaction in which holders of our common shares might receive a premium for their shares over the then prevailing market price or which holders might believe to be otherwise in their best interests.

Our Series A Preferred Stock is subject to interest rate risk.

Distributions payable on our Series A Preferred Stock are subject to interest rate risk. Because dividends on our Series A Preferred Stock are fixed, our costs may increase upon maturity or redemption of the securities. This might require us to sell investments at a time when we would otherwise not do so, which could affect adversely our ability to generate cash flow. To the extent that our Series A Preferred Stock may have call or conversion provisions that are in our favor at a given time, such provisions may be detrimental to the returns experienced by the holders of the securities.

Inflation may negatively affect the value of our Series A Preferred Stock and the dividends we pay.

Inflation is the reduction in the purchasing power of money, resulting from an increase in the price of goods and services. Inflation risk is the risk that the inflation-adjusted, or “real”, value of an investment will be worth less in the future. If and when the economy experiences material rates of inflation, the real value of our Series A Preferred Stock and the dividends payable to holders will decline.

Risks Related to Regulation

The U.S. federal government’s approach towards cannabis laws may be subject to change or may not proceed as previously outlined.

In an effort to provide guidance to U.S. federal law enforcement, under former President Barak Obama, the U.S. Department of Justice (the “DOJ”), released a memorandum on August 29, 2013 entitled “Guidance Regarding Marijuana Enforcement” from former Deputy Attorney General James Cole (the Cole Memorandum). The Cole Memorandum sought to limit the use of the U.S. federal government’s prosecutorial resources by providing United States attorneys (“U.S. Attorneys”) with certain priorities (the “Cole Priorities”) on which to focus their attention in states that have established cannabis programs with regulatory enforcement systems. U.S. Attorneys were required to adhere to the Cole Priorities until the rescission of the Cole Memorandum in January 2018.

Pursuant to his rescission of the Cole Memorandum, former Attorney General Jeffrey B. Sessions also issued a one-page memorandum known as the “Sessions Memorandum.” According to the Sessions Memorandum, the Cole Memorandum was “unnecessary” due to existing general enforcement guidance adopted in the 1980s, as set forth in the U.S. Attorney’s Manual (the “USAM”). The USAM enforcement priorities, like those of the Cole Memorandum, are also based on the U.S. federal government’s limited resources, and include “law enforcement priorities set by the Attorney General,” the “seriousness” of the alleged crimes, the “deterrent effect of criminal prosecution,” and “the cumulative impact of particular crimes on the community.”

Pamela Bondi was confirmed by the United States Senate as Attorney General of the United States on February 4, 2025. During her tenure as Attorney General in the State of Florida, Bondi routinely opposed the softening of anti-cannabis laws, including opposition to ballot initiatives to broaden access to medical cannabis, but she also generally faithfully enforced state cannabis laws to maintain a well-regulated medical cannabis market. Bondi has not provided a clear policy directive for the United States as it pertains to state-level cannabis-related activities, and there can be no assurances that DOJ or other law enforcement authorities will not seek to vigorously enforce current U.S. federal laws. It is generally expected that Bondi will closely follow the Trump Administration’s enforcement priorities.

Recent federal policy developments—including the Trump Executive Order directing federal agencies to reclassify marijuana from a Schedule I to a Schedule III controlled substance—introduce significant regulatory uncertainty for our business. Although the Trump Executive Order represents a major shift in the federal approach to cannabis, it does not legalize marijuana under federal law and requires completion of formal DEA administrative rulemaking before any change to marijuana’s legal status takes effect. As a result, our tenants that cultivate or process cannabis may continue to face federal enforcement risks until rescheduling is formally implemented.

Even if rescheduling is finalized, the implications for the cannabis industry—and therefore for our REIT operations—remain uncertain. A Schedule III designation could ease research restrictions and reduce certain tax burdens for operators, but would not resolve longstanding challenges, including potential limitations on banking services, federal oversight of cannabis-related facilities, or continued restrictions on interstate commerce. Moreover, legislative changes enacted in 2025 will classify many hemp-derived products containing trace THC as marijuana beginning November 12, 2026, creating additional compliance burdens across the cannabinoid supply chain. These shifting regulatory definitions may affect tenant operations, demand for our Greenhouse Portfolio properties, and the creditworthiness of existing or prospective tenants.

Changes in federal cannabis policy may also alter competitive dynamics within the industry. The emphasis of the Trump Executive Order on expanded research and medical access could accelerate the entry of well-capitalized pharmaceutical or agricultural companies into the cannabis market, potentially displacing smaller operators that are more likely to lease specialized greenhouse properties such as those owned by us. Public market volatility following the Trump Executive Order underscores the potential for rapid shifts in valuation, capital availability, and tenant stability. Any delays, modifications, or reversals in the federal rescheduling process—or related CBD and hemp reforms—could materially adversely affect tenant operations, occupancy rates, rental income, asset values, and our overall business and financial condition.

The U.S. federal government’s approach towards cannabis and cannabis-related activities remains uncertain. If the Rohrabacher-Blumenauer Amendment is not renewed in the future, and/or until the U.S. federal government amends the laws and its enforcement policies with respect to cannabis, allowing for use thereof, there is a risk that the DOJ and other U.S. federal agencies may utilize U.S. federal funds to enforce the CSA in states with a medical and adult-use cannabis program, which could have a material adverse effect on our current and future cannabis tenants.

Furthermore, while we have acquired additional cannabis facilities with the intent to lease those facilities for the cultivation and processing of medical-use cannabis facilities, our lease agreements do not prohibit our cannabis tenant from cultivating and processing cannabis for adult use, provided that such tenant complies with all applicable state and local rules and regulations. Certain of our tenants may opt to cultivate adult-use cannabis in our medical-use cannabis facilities, which may in turn subject our cannabis tenant, us and our properties to federal enforcement actions.

Laws, regulations and the policies with respect to the enforcement of such laws and regulations affecting the cannabis industry in the United States are constantly changing, and we cannot predict the impact that future regulations may have on us.

Medical and adult-use cannabis laws and regulations in the United States are complex, broad in scope, and subject to evolving interpretations. As a result, compliance with such laws and regulations could require us to incur substantial costs or alter certain aspects of our business. Violations of these laws, or allegations of such violations, could disrupt certain aspects of our business plan and may have a material adverse effect on certain aspects of our planned operations. Further, regulations may be enacted in the future that will be directly applicable to certain aspects of our tenants’ cannabis-related activities. We cannot predict the nature of any future laws, regulations, interpretations or applications, especially in the United States, nor can we determine what effect additional governmental regulations or administrative policies and procedures, when and if promulgated, could have on our business.

The FDA may seek to regulate cannabis under the Food, Drug and Cosmetics Act of 1938 or under the Public Health Service Act. Additionally, the FDA may issue rules, regulations, or guidance including certified good manufacturing practices, related to the growth, cultivation, harvesting and processing of medical cannabis. If regulated by the FDA as a drug, clinical trials may be needed to verify efficacy and safety. It is also possible that the FDA would require that facilities where cannabis is grown register with the FDA and comply with certain federally prescribed regulations. In the event that some or all of these regulations or enforcement actions are imposed, we do not know what the impact this would have on the cannabis industry, including what costs, requirements and possible prohibitions may be enforced. If we or our tenants are unable to comply with the regulations or registration as prescribed by the FDA, we and or our tenants may be unable to continue to operate their and our business in its current form or at all.

Currently, there are 47 states plus the District of Columbia and certain U.S. territories that have laws and/or regulations that recognize, in one form or another, consumer use of cannabis in connection with medical treatment. Of those, 11 states plus the District of Columbia and certain U.S. territories have laws and/or regulations that permit the adult-use of cannabis. Despite the recent Trump Executive Order directing the reclassification of marijuana as a Schedule III controlled substance under the CSA, it currently remains classified as a Schedule I controlled substance under the CSA and U.S. federal laws and regulations prohibit a range of activities regarding cannabis. Unless and until Congress amends the CSA with respect to cannabis (the timing and scope of which is not assured and hard to predict), there is a risk that governmental authorities in the United States may enforce current U.S. federal law, and we may, through our business activities, be deemed to be operating in direct violation of U.S. federal law. Accordingly, active enforcement of the current U.S. federal regulatory position on cannabis could have a material adverse effect on us. The risk of strict enforcement of the CSA in light of Congressional activity, judicial holdings, and stated policy remains uncertain, and any regulations prohibiting the use of cannabis, or prohibiting cannabis-related activities, could have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

In addition, relevant state or local rules and regulations may be amended or repealed, or new rules and regulations may be enacted in the future to eliminate prohibiting the cultivation, processing and dispensing of cannabis. If our cannabis tenants, or any future cannabis tenants, are forced to cease operations, we would be required to replace such tenant with one that is not engaged in the cannabis industry, who may pay significantly lower rents. If our cannabis tenant, or any future cannabis tenants, are forced to cease operations, we would be required to replace such tenant with one that is not engaged in the cannabis industry, who may pay significantly lower rents. Any changes in state or local laws that reduce or eliminate the ability to cultivate and produce cannabis would likely result in a high vacancy rate for the kinds of properties that we own and/or seek to acquire, which would depress our lease rates and property values. In addition, we would realize an economic loss on any and all improvements made to properties that were to be used in connection with cannabis cultivation and processing.

We may be subject to anti-money laundering laws and regulations in the United States.

Financial transactions involving proceeds generated by cannabis-related activities can form the basis for prosecution under the U.S. money laundering, financial recordkeeping and proceeds of crime, including the U.S. Currency and Foreign Transactions Reporting Act of 1970 (the “Bank Secrecy Act”), as amended by Title III of the Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act of 2001.

The Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (“FinCEN”), a bureau within the U.S. Department of the Treasury primarily charged with administering and enforcing the Bank Secrecy Act, previously issued a memorandum providing instructions to banks seeking to provide services to cannabis-related businesses (the “FinCEN Memorandum”). The FinCEN Memorandum states that in some circumstances, it is permissible for banks to provide services to cannabis-related businesses without risking prosecution for violation of U.S. federal money laundering laws, and explicitly refers to the Cole Priorities. As discussed above, the Cole Memorandum was rescinded in January 2018 and the decision to prosecute was left to the discretion of each U.S. Attorney in each district. The DOJ continues to have the right and power to prosecute crimes committed by banks and financial institutions, such as money laundering and violations of the Bank Secrecy Act, that occur in any state including states that have in some form legalized the sale of cannabis. Further, the conduct of the DOJ’s enforcement priorities could change for any number of reasons. A change in the DOJ’s priorities could result in the DOJ’s prosecuting banks and financial institutions for crimes that were not previously prosecuted.

If any of our investments, or any proceeds thereof, any dividends or distributions therefrom, or any profits or revenues accruing from such investments in the United States were found to be in violation of anti-money laundering laws or otherwise, such transactions may be viewed as proceeds of crime, including under one or more of the statutes discussed above. Any property, real or personal, and its proceeds, involved in or traceable to such a crime is subject to seizure by and forfeiture to governmental authorities. Any such seizure, forfeiture or other action by law enforcement regarding our assets could restrict or otherwise jeopardize our ability to declare or pay dividends or effect other distributions, and could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

While we do not presently have challenges with our banking relationships, should we have an inability to maintain our current bank accounts, or the inability of our cannabis tenants to maintain their current banking relationships, it would be difficult for us to operate our business, may increase our operating costs, could pose additional operational, logistical and security challenges and could result in our inability to implement our business plan.

Litigation, complaints, enforcement actions and governmental inquiries could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Our tenants’ participation in the cannabis industry may lead to litigation, formal or informal complaints, enforcement actions and governmental inquiries. Litigation, complaints, enforcement actions and governmental inquiries could consume considerable amounts of our financial and other resources, which could have a material adverse effect on our sales, revenue, profitability, and growth prospects.

Litigation, complaints, enforcement actions and governmental inquiries could result from cannabis-related activities in violation of federal law, including, but not limited to, the Racketeer Influenced Corrupt Organizations Act (“RICO”). RICO is a U.S. federal statute providing criminal penalties in addition to a civil cause of action for acts performed as part of an ongoing criminal organization. Under RICO, it is unlawful for any person who has received income derived from a pattern of racketeering activity, to use or invest any of that income in the acquisition of any interest, or the establishment or operation of, any enterprise that is engaged in interstate commerce. RICO also authorizes private parties whose properties or businesses are harmed by such patterns of racketeering activity to initiate a civil action against the individuals involved. Recently, a number of RICO lawsuits have been brought by neighbors of state-licensed cannabis farms, who allege they are bothered by noise and odor associated with cannabis production, which has also led to decreased property values. By alleging that the smell of cannabis interferes with the enjoyment of their property and drives down their property value, plaintiffs in these cases have effectively elevated common law nuisance claims into federal RICO lawsuits. These lawsuits have named not only the cannabis operator, but also supply chain partners and vendors that do not directly handle or otherwise “touch” cannabis. To our knowledge, none of these cases has been entirely dismissed at the pleadings stage, and we cannot be certain how the courts will rule on cannabis-related RICO lawsuits in the future. If a property owner were to assert such a claim against us, we may be required to devote significant resources and costs to defending ourselves against such a claim, and if a property owner were to be successful on such a claim, our cannabis tenant may be unable to continue to operate its business in its current form at the property, which could materially adversely impact such tenant’s business and the value of our property, our business and, financial condition and results of operations.

Further, although we are not currently subject to any litigation, from time to time in the normal course of our business operations, we, or any of our subsidiaries, may become subject to litigation, complaints, enforcement actions and governmental inquiries that may result in liability material to our financial statements as a whole or may negatively affect our operating results if changes to our business operations are required. The cost to defend such litigation, complaints, actions or inquiries may be significant and may require a diversion of our resources. There also may be adverse publicity associated with such litigation, complaints, actions or inquiries that could negatively affect customer perception of our business, regardless of whether the allegations are valid or whether we are ultimately found liable. Insurance may not be available at all or in sufficient amounts to cover any liabilities with respect to these or other matters. A judgment or other liability in excess of our insurance coverage for any claims could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Item 1B. Unresolved Staff Comments.

None

Item 1C. Cybersecurity.

We maintain a cyber risk management protocol designed to identify, assess, manage, mitigate, and respond to cybersecurity threats. We have undertaken, on an annual basis, to conduct an assessment of our cyber risk management processes and controls to identify, quantify, and categorize material cyber risks. In addition, we have developed a risk mitigation plan to address such risks, and where necessary, remediate potential vulnerabilities identified through the annual assessment process.

We employ a risk management strategy for the assessment, identification and management of material risks stemming from cybersecurity threats. Our methodologies involve a systematic evaluation of potential threats, vulnerabilities, and their potential impacts on our organization’s operations, data, and systems. Our cybersecurity risk management program includes:

	●	Risk assessments designed to help identify material cybersecurity risks to our critical systems, and our IT environment;
	●	The use of external service providers to assess, test or otherwise assist with aspects of our security controls;

Our management team is responsible for oversight and administration of our cyber risk management protocol, and for informing relevant stakeholders regarding the prevention, detection, mitigation, and remediation of cybersecurity incidents. Our management team does not have prior experience administrating cybersecurity initiatives and processes, but intends to rely on threat intelligence as well as other information obtained from governmental, public or private sources and, if necessary, third-party consultants providing cyber risk services. Our Audit Committee also provides oversight of risks from cybersecurity threats, and specifically reviews and discusses our policies regarding information technology security and protection from cyber risks.

Our third-party service providers are primarily responsible for the security of their own information technology environments and in certain instances we rely significantly on third-party service providers to supply and store our sensitive data in a secure manner. All of these third parties face potential risks relating to cybersecurity similar to ours which could disrupt their businesses and therefore adversely impact us. While we provide guidance and specific requirements in some cases, we do not directly control any of these parties’ information technology security operations, or the amount of investment they place in guarding against cybersecurity threats. Accordingly, we are subject to any flaw or breaches to their information technology systems, or those which they operate for us, which could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition or results of operations.

We face risks from cybersecurity threats that could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations, cash flows or reputation. We acknowledge that the risk of cyber incidents is prevalent in the current threat landscape and that a future cyber incident may occur in the normal course of its business. To date, we have not had a cybersecurity incident. We proactively seek to detect and investigate unauthorized attempts and attacks against our IT assets, data, and services, and to prevent their occurrence and recurrence where practicable through changes or updates to internal processes and tools and changes or updates to service delivery; however, potential vulnerabilities to known or unknown threats will remain. Further, there is increasing regulation regarding responses to cybersecurity incidents, including reporting to regulators, investors, and additional stakeholders, which could subject us to additional liability and reputational harm. See Item 1A. “Risk Factors” for more information on cybersecurity risks.