ITEM 1A.    RISK FACTORS

        Investing in our securities involves risk. Persons investing in our securities should carefully consider the risks described below and the other information contained in this report and other filings that we make from time to time with the SEC, including our consolidated and combined financial statements and accompanying notes. Any of the following risks could materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition or results of operations. Our business, financial condition or results of operations could also be adversely affected by additional factors that apply to all companies generally, as well as other risks that are not currently known to us or that we currently view to be immaterial. In any such case, the trading price of our securities could decline and you may lose all or part of your original investment. While we attempt to mitigate known risks to the extent we believe to be practicable and reasonable, we can provide no assurance, and we make no representation, that our mitigation efforts will be successful.

Risks Related to Our Business

Difficult market conditions can adversely affect our business in many ways, including by reducing the value or performance of the investments that we manage or by reducing the ability of our funds to raise or deploy capital, each of which could negatively impact our net income and cash flow and adversely affect our financial condition.

        Our business is materially affected by conditions in the financial markets and economic conditions or events throughout the world, such as interest rates, availability of credit, inflation rates, economic uncertainty, changes in laws (including laws relating to taxation), trade barriers, commodity prices, currency exchange rates and controls and national and international political circumstances (including wars, terrorist acts or security operations). For example, the unprecedented turmoil in the global financial markets during 2008 and 2009 provoked significant volatility of securities prices, contraction in the availability of credit and the failure of a number of companies, including leading financing institutions, and had a material adverse effect on our businesses. While the adverse effects of that period have abated to a degree, economic weakness has continued, characterized by low levels of growth and high levels of unemployment and governmental deficits in major markets including the

27

Table of Contents

United States and Europe. In addition, global financial markets have experienced significant volatility following the downgrade by Standard & Poor's on August 5, 2011 of the long-term credit rating of U.S. Treasury debt from AAA to AA+. Furthermore while a number of policy actions have been implemented with respect to debt and banks in a number of European countries, Europe continues to experience negative growth and ongoing austerity. Deleveraging in the developed world is continuing and likely to persist in the near-term. Furthermore, while U.S. financial institutions have seen recent improvements, global financial institutions have generally not yet provided debt financing in amounts and on terms commensurate with what they provided prior to 2008.

        Such market and economic conditions are outside our control and may affect the level and volatility of securities prices and the liquidity and the value of our investments. In addition, we may not be able to or may choose not to manage our exposure to these conditions and/or events. For example, as of March 31, 2009, the date of the lowest aggregate valuation of our private equity funds during the most recent downturn, the investments in our contributed private equity funds were marked down to 67% of original cost. Our profitability may also be adversely affected by our fixed costs and the possibility that we would be unable to scale back other costs within a time frame sufficient to match any decreases in net income relating to changes in market and economic conditions.

        Unfavorable market conditions may reduce opportunities for our funds to make, exit and realize value from their investments. For example, when financing is not available, it is difficult for potential buyers to raise sufficient capital to purchase assets in our funds' portfolios. Consequently, we may earn lower than expected returns on investments, which could cause us to realize diminished or no carried interest. In addition, we may not be able to find suitable investments for the funds to effectively deploy capital, which could adversely affect our ability to raise new funds because we can generally only raise capital for a successor fund following the substantial deployment of capital from the existing fund. In the event of poor performance by existing funds or during periods of unfavorable fundraising conditions, as have prevailed in recent years, pressures by fund investors for lower fees, different fee sharing arrangements for transaction or other fees, and other concessions (for example, the inclusion of performance hurdles that will require us in our newer funds, such as North America Fund XI and Asian Fund II, to generate a specified return on investment prior to our right to receive carried interest) will likely continue and could increase. The outcome of such negotiations could result in our agreement to terms that are materially less favorable to us than for prior funds we have managed. In the circumstances described above, successor funds raised by us are also likely in many instances to be smaller than our comparable predecessor funds. Fund investors may also seek to redeploy capital away from certain of our fixed income or other non-private equity investment vehicles, which permit redemptions on relatively short notice, in order to meet liquidity needs or invest in other asset classes. Any of these developments could adversely affect our future revenues, net income, cash flow, financial condition or ability to retain our employees. See "—Our inability to raise additional or successor funds could have a material adverse impact on our business" and "—Our investors in future funds may negotiate to pay us lower management fees and the economic terms of our future funds may be less favorable to us than those of our existing funds, which could adversely affect our revenues."

        During periods of difficult market or economic conditions or slowdowns (which may be across one or more industries, sectors or geographies), companies in which we have invested may experience decreased revenues, financial losses, credit rating downgrades, difficulty in obtaining access to financing and increased funding costs. These companies may also have difficulty in expanding their businesses and operations or be unable to meet their debt service obligations or other expenses as they become due, including amounts payable to us. Negative financial results in our funds' portfolio companies may result in lower investment returns for our investment funds, which could materially and adversely affect our operating results and cash flow. To the extent the operating performance of such portfolio companies (as well as valuation multiples) deteriorate or do not improve, our funds may sell those assets at values that are less than we projected or even at a loss, thereby significantly affecting those funds' performance and consequently our operating results and cash flow. During periods of economic difficulty, our investment funds' portfolio companies may also have difficulty expanding their businesses

28

Table of Contents

and operations or meeting their debt service obligations or other expenses as they become due, including amounts payable to us. Furthermore, negative market conditions or a specific market dislocation may result in lower investment returns for our funds, which would further adversely affect our net income. Adverse conditions may also increase the risk of default with respect to private equity, fixed income and other equity investments that we manage. Even if economic and market conditions do improve broadly, adverse conditions in particular sectors may also cause our performance to suffer. Finally, low interest rates related to monetary stimulus and economic stagnation may negatively impact expected returns on all types of investments as the demand for relatively higher return assets increases and the supply decreases.

Changes in the debt financing markets may negatively impact the ability of our investment funds and their portfolio companies to obtain attractive financing for their investments and may increase the cost of such financing if it is obtained, which could lead to lower-yielding investments and potentially decrease our net income.

        In the event that our funds are unable to obtain committed debt financing for potential acquisitions or can only obtain debt at an increased interest rate or on unfavorable terms, our funds may have difficulty completing otherwise profitable acquisitions or may generate profits that are lower than would otherwise be the case, either of which could lead to a decrease in the investment income earned by us. Any failure by lenders to provide previously committed financing can also expose us to potential claims by sellers of businesses which we may have contracted to purchase. Similarly, our portfolio companies regularly utilize the corporate debt markets in order to obtain financing for their operations. To the extent that credit markets render such financing difficult to obtain or more expensive, this may negatively impact the operating performance of those portfolio companies and, therefore, the investment returns on our funds. In addition, to the extent that the markets make it difficult or impossible to refinance debt that is maturing in the near term, we or some of our portfolio companies may be unable to repay such debt at maturity and may be forced to sell assets, undergo a recapitalization or seek bankruptcy protection. In addition, to the extent that conditions in the credit markets impair the ability of our portfolio companies to refinance or extend maturities on their outstanding debt, either on favorable terms or at all, the operating performance of those portfolio companies may be negatively impacted, which could impair the value of our investment in those portfolio companies and lead to a decrease in the investment income earned by us. In some cases, the inability of our portfolio companies to refinance or extend maturities may result in the inability of those companies to repay debt at maturity and may cause the companies to sell assets, undergo a recapitalization or seek bankruptcy protection, which would also likely impair the value of our investment and lead to a decrease in investment income earned by us.

Adverse economic and market conditions may adversely affect our liquidity position, which could adversely affect our business operations in the future.

        We expect that our primary liquidity needs will consist of cash required to:

•

continue to grow our business, including seeding new strategies and funding our capital commitments made to existing and future funds, co-investments and any net capital requirements of our capital markets companies;



•

service debt obligations, as well as any contingent liabilities that may give rise to future cash payments;



•

fund cash operating expenses;



•

pay amounts that may become due under our tax receivable agreement with KKR Holdings;

29

Table of Contents

•

make cash distributions in accordance with our distribution policy;



•

underwrite commitments within our capital markets business; and



•

acquire additional principal assets, including other investment advisory and broker-dealer businesses.

        These liquidity requirements are significant and, in some cases, involve capital that will remain invested for extended periods of time. As of December 31, 2012, we have approximately $677.9 million of remaining unfunded capital commitments to our investment funds. Our commitments to our funds will require significant cash outlays over time, and there can be no assurance that we will be able to generate sufficient cash flows from realizations of investments to fund them. In addition, as of December 31, 2012, we had $500.0 million of borrowings outstanding under our credit facilities and debt securities and $1,534.3 million of cash and short-term investments, which does not include $500 million of senior notes issued on February 1, 2013. While we have long-term committed financings with substantial facility limits, the terms of those facilities will expire in 2016 and 2017 and our senior notes become due in 2020 and 2043 (see "Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations—Liquidity"), and any borrowings thereunder will require refinancing or renewal, which could result in higher borrowing costs, or issuing equity. Depending on credit market conditions, we may not be able to renew all or part of these borrowings or find alternate sources of financing on commercially reasonable terms or raise equity. In addition, the underwriting commitments for our capital markets business may require significant cash obligations, and these commitments may also put pressure on our liquidity. The holding company for our capital markets business has entered into a credit agreement that provides for revolving borrowings of up to $500 million, which can be used in connection with our capital markets business, including placing and underwriting securities offerings. To the extent we commit to buy and sell an issue of securities in firm commitment underwritings or otherwise, we may be required to borrow under our credit agreement for our capital markets business to fund such obligations, which, depending on the size and timing of the obligations, may limit our ability to enter into other underwriting arrangements or similar activities, service existing debt obligations or otherwise grow our business. Regulatory capital requirements may also limit the ability of our broker-dealer subsidiaries to participate in underwriting or other transactions or to allocate our capital more efficiently across our businesses. In addition, in connection with our acquisitions of Prisma and a minority interest in Nephila, we may be obligated to make future deferred purchase price payments based on the respective performance of these businesses. In the event that our liquidity requirements were to exceed available liquid assets for the reasons specified above or for any other reason, we could be forced to sell assets or seek to raise debt or equity capital on unfavorable terms.

The "clawback" or "net loss sharing" provisions in our governing agreements may give rise to a contingent obligation that may require us to return or contribute amounts to our funds and fund investors.

        The partnership documents governing our carry paying funds, including funds and vehicles relating to private equity, mezzanine, infrastructure and special situations investments, generally include a "clawback" provision that, if triggered, may give rise to a contingent obligation requiring the general partner to return or contribute amounts to the fund for distribution to investors at the end of the life of the fund. Under a clawback obligation, upon the liquidation of a fund, the general partner is required to return, typically on an after-tax basis, previously distributed carry to the extent that, due to the diminished performance of later investments, the aggregate amount of carry distributions received by the general partner during the term of the fund exceed the amount to which the general partner was ultimately entitled, including the effects of any performance hurdles. Excluding carried interest received by the general partners of funds that were not contributed to us in the KPE Transaction, as of December 31, 2012, no carried interest was subject to this clawback obligation, assuming that all applicable carry paying funds were liquidated at their December 31, 2012 fair values. Had the

30

Table of Contents

investments in such funds been liquidated at zero value, the clawback obligation would have been $1,095.4 million.

        Certain private equity funds that were contributed to us in the KPE Transaction also include a "net loss sharing provision." Upon the liquidation of an investment vehicle to which a net loss sharing obligation applies, the general partner is required to contribute capital to the vehicle to fund 20% of the net losses on investments. In these vehicles, such losses would be required to be paid by us to the limited partners in those vehicles in the event of a liquidation of the fund regardless of whether any carried interest had previously been distributed, and a greater share of the investment losses would be allocable to us relative to the capital that we contributed to it as the general partner. Based on the fair market values as of December 31, 2012, there would have been no net loss sharing obligation. If these net loss sharing vehicles were liquidated at zero value, the net loss sharing obligation as of December 31, 2012 would have been approximately $616.7 million.

        Prior to the KPE Transaction, certain of our principals who received carried interest distributions with respect to certain private equity funds contributed to us had personally guaranteed, on a several basis and subject to a cap, the contingent obligations of the general partners of such private equity funds to repay amounts to fund limited partners pursuant to the general partners' clawback obligations. The terms of the KPE Transaction require that our principals remain responsible for clawback obligations relating to carry distributions received prior to the KPE Transaction up to a maximum of $223.6 million. Carry distributions arising subsequent to the KPE Transaction may give rise to clawback obligations that may be allocated generally to us and to our principals who participate in the carry pool. Unlike the clawback obligation, we will be responsible for amounts due under a net loss sharing obligation and will indemnify our principals for any personal guarantees that they have provided with respect to such amounts. In addition, guarantees of or similar arrangements relating to, clawback or net loss sharing obligations in favor of third party investors in an individual investment partnership by entities we own may limit distributions of carried interest more generally.

Our earnings and cash flow are highly variable due to the nature of our business and we do not intend to provide earnings guidance, each of which may cause the value of interests in our business to be volatile.

        Our earnings are highly variable from quarter to quarter due to the volatility of investment returns of most of our funds and other investment vehicles and our principal assets and the fees earned from our businesses. We recognize earnings on investments in our funds based on our allocable share of realized and unrealized gains (or losses) reported by such funds and for certain of our recent funds, when a performance hurdle is achieved. A decline in realized or unrealized gains, a failure to achieve a performance hurdle or an increase in realized or unrealized losses, would adversely affect our net income. Fee income, which we recognize when contractually earned, can vary due to fluctuations in AUM, the number of investment transactions made by our funds, the number of portfolio companies we manage, the fee provisions contained in our funds and other investment products and transactions by our capital markets business. Fees for the years ended December 31, 2010, 2011 and 2012 were $435.4 million, $723.6 million and $568.4 million, respectively. We may create new funds or investment products or vary the terms of our funds or investment products, which may alter the composition or mix of our income from time to time. We may also experience fluctuations in our results from quarter to quarter, including our revenue and net income, due to a number of other factors, including changes in the values of our funds' investments, changes in the amount of distributions or interest earned in respect of investments, changes in our operating expenses, the degree to which we encounter competition and general economic and market conditions. Net income (loss) attributable to KKR & Co. L.P. for the years ended December 31, 2010, 2011 and 2012 was $333.2 million, $1.9 million and $560.8 million, respectively. Such fluctuations may lead to variability in the value of interests in our business and cause our results for a particular period not to be indicative of our performance in future periods. It may be difficult for us to achieve steady growth in net income and

31

Table of Contents

cash flow on a quarterly basis, which could in turn lead to large adverse movements in the value of interests in our business.

        The timing and receipt of carried interest from our investment funds are unpredictable and will contribute to the volatility of our cash flows. For example, carried interest on our private equity funds is generally distributed to the general partner of a vehicle with a clawback or net loss sharing provision only after all of the following are met: (i) a realization event has occurred (e.g., sale of a portfolio company, dividend, etc.); (ii) the vehicle has achieved positive overall investment returns on realized investments since its inception, in excess of a performance hurdle, where applicable; and (iii) with respect to investments with a fair value below cost, cost has been returned to fund investors in an amount sufficient to reduce remaining cost to the investments' fair value. Carried interest payments from investments depend on our funds' performance and opportunities for realizing gains, which may be limited. It takes a substantial period of time to identify attractive investment opportunities, to raise all the funds needed to make an investment and then to realize the cash value (or other proceeds) of an investment through a sale, public offering or other exit. To the extent an investment is not profitable, no carried interest shall be received from our funds with respect to that investment and, to the extent such investment remains unprofitable, we will only be entitled to a management fee on that investment. Furthermore, certain vehicles and separately managed accounts may not provide for the payment of carry at all. Even if an investment proves to be profitable, it may be several years before any profits can be realized in cash. We cannot predict when, or if, any realization of investments will occur. In addition, if finance providers, such as commercial and investment banks, make it difficult for potential purchasers to secure financing to purchase companies in our investment funds' portfolio, it may decrease potential realization events and the potential to earn carried interest. A downturn in the equity markets would also make it more difficult to exit investments by selling equity securities. If we were to have a realization event in a particular quarter, the event may have a significant impact on our cash flows during the quarter that may not be replicated in subsequent quarters. A decline in realized or unrealized gains, or an increase in realized or unrealized losses, would adversely affect our investment income, which could further increase the volatility of our quarterly results.

        In addition, with respect to certain of the funds and vehicles that we advise, such as hedge funds, fund of funds and KFN, we are entitled to incentive fees that are generally paid annually, semi-annually or quarterly if the net asset value of a fund has increased over a certain pre-determined hurdle rate or a specified high-water mark. These funds, but not KFN, also have "high-water mark" provisions whereby if the funds have experienced losses in prior periods, we will not be able to earn incentive fees with respect to an fund investor's account until the net asset value of the fund investor's account exceeds the highest period end value on which incentive fees were previously paid. The incentive fees we earn are therefore dependent on the net asset value of these funds or vehicles, which could lead to volatility in our quarterly results and cash flow.

        The timing and receipt of carried interest also varies with the life cycle of our funds. Our carry paying funds that are in harvesting periods when they are making realization events for mature investments are more likely to make larger distributions than our carrying paying funds that are in their fund raising or investment periods that precede the harvesting period. During times when a significant portion of our assets under management is attributable to carry paying funds that are not in their harvesting periods, we may receive substantially lower carried interest distributions.

A decline in the pace or size of investment by our funds or an increase in the amount of transaction fees we share with our fund investors would result in our receiving less revenue from transaction fees.

        The transaction fees that we earn are driven in part by the pace at which our funds make investments and the size of those investments. Any decline in that pace or the size of such investments

32

Table of Contents

would reduce our transaction fees and could make it more difficult for us to raise capital. Many factors could cause such a decline in the pace of investment, including:

•

the inability of our investment professionals to identify attractive investment opportunities;



•

competition for such opportunities among other potential acquirers;



•

decreased availability of capital or financing on attractive terms;



•

our failure to consummate identified investment opportunities because of business, regulatory or legal complexities and adverse developments in the U.S. or global economy or financial markets; and



•

terms we may provide to our fund investors to increase the percentage of transaction or other fees we may share with them.

Our inability to raise additional or successor funds (or raise successor funds of a comparable size as our predecessor funds) could have a material adverse impact on our business.

        Our current private equity funds and certain other funds and investment vehicles have a finite life and a finite amount of commitments from fund investors. Once a fund nears the end of its investment period, our success depends on our ability to raise additional or successor funds in order to keep making investments and, over the long term, earning management fees (although our funds and investment vehicles generally continue to earn management fees at a reduced fee rate after the expiration of their investment periods). Even if we are successful in raising successor funds, to the extent we are unable to raise successor funds of a comparable size to our predecessor funds, our revenues may decrease as the investment period of our predecessor funds expire and associated fees decrease. For example, the ultimate size of KKR North America Fund XI, our most recent private equity fund focused primarily on North America, will be smaller than its predecessor fund. The evolving preferences of our fund investors may necessitate that alternatives to the traditional investment fund structure, such as managed accounts, smaller funds and co-investment vehicles become a larger part of our business going forward. This could increase our cost of raising capital at the scale we have historically achieved. Furthermore, in order to raise capital for new strategies and products without drawing capital away from our existing products, we will need to seek new sources of capital. Institutional investors in funds that have suffered from decreasing returns, liquidity pressure, increased volatility or difficulty maintaining targeted asset allocations, may materially decrease or temporarily suspend making new fund investments. Such investors may elect to reduce their overall portfolio allocations to alternative investments such as private equity funds, resulting in a smaller overall pool of available capital in our industry. In addition, the asset allocation rules or regulations or investment policies to which such third-party investors are subject, could inhibit or restrict the ability of third-party investors to make investments in our investment funds. Coupled with a lack of distributions from their existing investment portfolios, many of these investors may have been left with disproportionately outsized remaining commitments to, and invested capital in, a number of investment funds, which significantly limited their ability to make new commitments to third-party managed investment funds such as those advised by us.

        Fund investors may also seek to redeploy capital away from certain of our fixed income vehicles, hedge fund, fund of funds or other investment vehicles, which permit redemptions on relatively short notice in order to meet liquidity needs or invest in other asset classes. We believe that our ability to avoid excessive redemption levels primarily depends on our funds' continued satisfactory performance, although redemptions may also be driven by other factors important to our fund investors, including their need for liquidity and compliance with investment mandates, even if our performance is superior. Any such redemptions would decrease our AUM and revenues.

33

Table of Contents

        In addition, the "Volcker Rule" passed in connection with the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act is expected to severely limit or prohibit investments in private equity funds by U.S. banks (and in some cases non-U.S. banks) and could limit such investments by regulated insurance companies. Financial institutions have historically represented an important class of investors in our funds, including approximately 11% of our AUM as of December 31, 2012, and it is possible that other institutions will not be available to replace this traditional source of capital for our private equity funds. To the extent we are unable to raise additional or successor funds (or to raise successor funds of the same size as our predecessor funds), our AUM and revenues will likely decrease as the investment period of our predecessor funds expire and associated fees decrease.

Our investors in future funds, including separately managed accounts, may negotiate to pay us lower management fees and the economic terms of our future funds may be less favorable to us than those of our existing funds, which could adversely affect our revenues.

        In connection with raising new funds or securing additional investments in existing funds, we negotiate terms for such funds and investments with investors. The outcome of such negotiations could result in our agreement to terms that are materially less favorable to us than the terms of prior funds we have advised or funds advised by our competitors. For example such terms could restrict our ability to raise investment funds with investment objectives or strategies that compete with existing funds, reduce fee revenues we earn, reduce the percentage of profits on third-party capital in which we share, include a performance hurdle that requires us to generate a specified return on investment prior to our right to receive carried interest or add expenses and obligations for us in managing the fund or increase our potential liabilities. For example our newest private equity funds such as North America Fund XI and Asian Fund II include a performance hurdle that requires us to generate a 7% return on investment prior to receiving our share of fund gains. Furthermore, as institutional investors increasingly consolidate their relationships with investment firms and competition becomes more acute, we may receive more such requests to modify the terms in our new funds. Agreement to terms that are materially less favorable to us could result in a decrease in our profitability.

        Certain institutional investors have also publicly criticized certain fund fee and expense structures, including management fees and transaction and advisory fees. We have received and expect to continue to receive requests from a variety of fund investors and groups representing such investors to decrease fees and to modify our carried interest and incentive fee structures, which could result in a reduction or delay in the timing of receipt of the fees and carried interest and incentive fees we earn. In September of 2009, the Institutional Limited Partners Association, or "ILPA," published a set of Private Equity Principles, or the "Principles," which were revised in January 2011. The Principles were developed in order to encourage discussion between limited partners and general partners regarding private equity fund partnership terms. Certain of the Principles call for enhanced "alignment of interests" between general partners and limited partners through modifications of some of the terms of fund arrangements, including proposed guidelines for fees and carried interest structures. We provided ILPA our endorsement of the Principles, representing an indication of our general support for the efforts of ILPA.

        In addition, certain institutional investors, including sovereign wealth funds and public pension funds, have demonstrated an increased preference for alternatives to the traditional investment fund structure, such as managed accounts, specialized funds and co-investment vehicles. We also have entered into strategic partnerships with individual investors whereby we manage that investor's capital across a variety of our products on separately negotiated terms. There can be no assurance that such alternatives will be as profitable to us as the traditional investment fund structure, and the impact such a trend could have on our results of operations, if widely implemented, is unclear. Moreover, certain institutional investors are demonstrating a preference to in-source their own investment professionals

34

Table of Contents

and to make direct investments in alternative assets without the assistance of private equity advisers like us. Such institutional investors may become our competitors and could cease to be our clients.

        Any agreement to terms less favorable to us could adversely affect our revenues and profitability.

The investment management business is intensely competitive, which could have a material adverse impact on our business.

        We compete as an investment manager for both fund investors and investment opportunities. The investment management business is highly fragmented, with our competitors consisting primarily of sponsors of public and private investment funds, business development companies, investment banks, commercial finance companies and operating companies acting as strategic buyers of businesses. We believe that competition for fund investors is based primarily on:

•

investment performance;



•

investor liquidity and willingness to invest;



•

investor perception of investment managers' drive, focus and alignment of interest;



•

business reputation;



•

the duration of relationships with fund investors;



•

the quality of services provided to fund investors;



•

pricing;



•

fund terms (including fees); and



•

the relative attractiveness of the types of investments that have been or will be made.

        We believe that competition for investment opportunities is based primarily on the pricing, terms and structure of a proposed investment and certainty of execution.

        A number of factors serve to increase our competitive risks:

•

a number of our competitors in some of our businesses may have greater financial, technical, marketing and other resources and more personnel than we do;



•

fund investors may materially decrease their allocations in new funds in light of their experiences following an economic downturn or seek to consolidate their relationships with investment firms;



•

some of our competitors may have better expertise or be regarded by fund investors as having better expertise in a specific asset class or geographic region than we do;



•

some of our competitors have agreed to terms on their investment funds or products that may be more favorable than our funds or products, such as lower management fees, greater fee sharing, or performance hurdles for carried interest, and therefore we may be forced to match or otherwise revise our terms to be less favorable than they have been in the past;



•

some of our funds may not perform as well as competitors' funds or other available investment products;



•

fund investors may reduce their investments in our funds or not make additional investments in our funds based upon their available capital or due to regulatory requirements;



•

our competitors have raised or may raise significant amounts of capital, and many of them have similar investment objectives and strategies to our funds, which may create additional competition for investment opportunities and may reduce the size and duration of pricing inefficiencies that many alternative investment strategies seek to exploit;

35

Table of Contents

•

some of these competitors may also have a lower cost of capital and access to funding sources that are not available to us, which may create competitive disadvantages for us with respect to investment opportunities;



•

some of our competitors may have higher risk tolerances, different risk assessments or lower return thresholds, which could allow them to consider a wider variety of investments and to bid more aggressively than us for investments;



•

some of our competitors may be subject to less regulation or less regulatory scrutiny and accordingly may have more flexibility to undertake and execute certain businesses or investments than we do and/or bear less expense to comply with such regulations than we do;



•

there are relatively few barriers to entry impeding the formation of new funds, including a relatively low cost of entering these businesses, and the successful efforts of new entrants into our various lines of business, including major commercial and investment banks and other financial institutions, have resulted in increased competition;



•

some fund investors may prefer to invest with an investment manager that is not publicly traded, is smaller, or manages fewer investment products; and



•

other industry participants will from time to time seek to recruit our investment professionals and other employees away from us.

        We may lose investment opportunities in the future if we do not match investment prices, structures and terms offered by competitors. Our competitors that are corporate buyers may be able to achieve synergistic cost savings in respect of an investment, which may provide them with a competitive advantage in bidding for an investment. Alternatively, we may experience decreased investment returns and increased risks of loss if we match investment prices, structures and terms offered by competitors. Moreover, if we are forced to compete with other investment firms on the basis of price, we may not be able to maintain our current fund fee, carried interest or other terms. There is a risk that fees and carried interest in the alternative investment management industry will decline, without regard to the historical performance of a manager. Fee or carried interest income reductions on existing or future funds, without corresponding decreases in our cost structure, would adversely affect our revenues and profitability.

        In addition, if interest rates were to rise or if market conditions for competing investment products become or are favorable and such products begin to offer rates of return superior to those achieved by our funds, the attractiveness of our funds relative to investments in other investment products could decrease. This competitive pressure could adversely affect our ability to make successful investments and limit our ability to raise future funds, either of which would adversely impact our business, results of operations and cash flow.

Our structure involves complex provisions of U.S. federal income tax laws for which no clear precedent or authority may be available. These structures also are subject to potential legislative, judicial or administrative change and differing interpretations, possibly on a retroactive basis.

        The U.S. federal income tax treatment of our unitholders depends in some instances on determinations of fact and interpretations of complex provisions of U.S. federal income tax laws for which no clear precedent or authority may be available. You should be aware that the U.S. federal income tax rules are constantly under review by persons involved in the legislative process, the Internal Revenue Service, or IRS, and the U.S. Department of the Treasury frequently resulting in revised interpretations of established concepts, statutory changes, revisions to regulations and other modifications and interpretations. The present U.S. federal income tax treatment of owning our common units may be modified by administrative, legislative or judicial interpretation at any time, and any such action may affect investments and commitments previously made. For instance, changes to the

36

Table of Contents

U.S. federal tax laws and interpretations thereof could make it more difficult or impossible for us to be treated as a partnership that is not taxable as a corporation for U.S. federal income tax purposes, affect the tax considerations of owning our common units, change the character or treatment of portions of our income (including, for instance, the treatment of carried interest as ordinary income rather than capital gain) and adversely impact your investment in our common units. See the discussion below under "—The U.S. Congress has considered legislation that would have (i) in some cases after a ten-year period, precluded us from qualifying as a partnership or required us to hold carried interest through taxable subsidiary corporations and (ii) taxed certain income and gains at increased rates. If any similar legislation were to be enacted and apply to us, the after tax income and gain related to our business, as well as the market price of our units, could be reduced." Our organizational documents and agreements give the Managing Partner broad authority to modify the amended and restated partnership agreement from time to time as the Managing Partner determines to be necessary or appropriate, without the consent of the unitholders, to address changes in U.S. federal, state and local income tax regulations, legislation or interpretation. In some circumstances, such revisions could have a material adverse impact on some or all unitholders. For instance, the Managing Partner could elect at some point to treat us as an association taxable as a corporation for U.S. federal (and applicable state) income tax purposes. If the Managing Partner were to do this, the U.S. federal income tax consequences of owning our common units would be materially different. Moreover, certain assumptions and conventions will be applied in an attempt to comply with applicable rules and to report income, gain, deduction, loss and credit to unitholders in a manner that reflects such unitholders' beneficial ownership of partnership items, taking into account variation in ownership interests during each taxable year because of trading activity. However, those assumptions and conventions may not be in compliance with all aspects of applicable tax requirements. It is possible that the IRS will assert successfully that the conventions and assumptions used by us do not satisfy the technical requirements of the Internal Revenue Code and/or Treasury regulations and could require that items of income, gain, deductions, loss or credit, including interest deductions, be adjusted, reallocated or disallowed in a manner that adversely affects our unitholders.

The U.S. Congress has considered legislation that would have (i) in some cases after a ten-year period, precluded us from qualifying as a partnership or required us to hold carried interest through taxable subsidiary corporations and (ii) taxed certain income and gains at increased rates. If any similar legislation were to be enacted and apply to us, the after tax income and gain related to our business, as well as the market price of our units, could be reduced.

        Over the past several years, a number of legislative and administrative proposals have been introduced and, in certain cases, have been passed by the U.S. House of Representatives. In May 2010 the U.S. House of Representatives passed legislation, or the "May 2010 House bill", that would have, in general, treated income and gains, including gain on sale, attributable to an interest in an investment services partnership interest, or "ISPI", as income subject to a new blended tax rate that is higher than under current law, except to the extent such ISPI would have been considered under the legislation to be a qualified capital interest. Your interest in us, our interest in KKR Fund Holdings L.P. and the interests that KKR Fund Holdings L.P. holds in entities that are entitled to receive carried interest may have been classified as ISPIs for purposes of this legislation. The U.S. Senate considered but did not pass similar legislation. On February 14, 2012, Representative Levin introduced similar legislation, or the "2012 Levin bill", that would tax carried interest at ordinary income tax rates (which would be higher than the proposed blended rate under the May 2010 House bill). It is unclear when or whether the U.S. Congress will pass such legislation or what provisions will be included in any legislation, if enacted.

        Both the May 2010 House bill and the 2012 Levin bill provided that, for taxable years beginning ten years after the date of enactment, income derived with respect to an ISPI that is not a qualified capital interest and that is subject to the rules discussed above would not meet the qualifying income

37

Table of Contents

requirements under the publicly traded partnership rules. Therefore, if similar legislation is enacted, following such ten-year period, we would be precluded from qualifying as a partnership for U.S. federal income tax purposes or be required to hold all such ISPIs through corporations, possibly U.S. corporations. If we were taxed as a U.S. corporation or required to hold all ISPIs through corporations, our effective tax rate would increase significantly. The federal statutory rate for corporations is currently 35%. In addition, we could be subject to increased state and local taxes. Furthermore, you could be subject to tax on our conversion into a corporation or any restructuring required in order for us to hold our ISPIs through a corporation. KKR's principals and other professionals could face additional adverse tax consequences under the legislation, which might thereby adversely affect KKR's ability to offer attractive incentive opportunities for key personnel.

        On September 12, 2011, the Obama administration submitted similar legislation to Congress in the American Jobs Act that would tax income and gain, now treated as capital gains, including gain on disposition of interests, attributable to an ISPI at rates higher than the capital gains rate applicable to such income under current law, with an exception for certain qualified capital interests. The proposed legislation would also characterize certain income and gain in respect of ISPIs as non-qualifying income under the publicly traded partnership rules after a ten-year transition period from the effective date, with an exception for certain qualified capital interests. This proposed legislation follows several prior statements by the Obama administration in support of changing the taxation of carried interest. Furthermore, in the proposed American Jobs Act, the Obama administration proposed that current law regarding the treatment of carried interest be changed for taxable years ending after December 31, 2012 to subject such income to ordinary income tax. In its published revenue proposal for 2013, the Obama administration proposed that the current law regarding treatment of carried interest be changed to subject such income to ordinary income tax. The Obama administration's published revenue proposals for 2010, 2011 and 2012 contained similar proposals.

        States and other jurisdictions have also considered legislation to increase taxes with respect to carried interest. For example, New York has periodically considered legislation under which you could be subject to New York state income tax on income in respect of our common units as a result of certain activities of our affiliates in New York, although it is unclear when or whether such legislation will be enacted.

        If the proposed legislation described above or any similar legislation were to be enacted and apply to us, the after tax income and gain related to our business, as well as the market price of our units, could be reduced.

Additional proposed changes in the U.S. taxation of businesses could adversely affect us.

        On February 22, 2012, the Obama administration announced its framework of key elements to change the U.S. federal income tax rules for businesses. Few specifics were included, and it is unclear what any actual legislation could provide, when it would be proposed or what its prospects for enactment could be. Several parts of the framework if enacted could adversely affect us. First, the framework could reduce the deductibility of interest for corporations in some manner not specified. A reduction in interest deductions could increase our tax rate and thereby reduce cash available for distribution to unitholders or for other uses by us. Such a reduction could also limit our ability to finance new transactions and increase the effective cost of financing by companies in which we invest, which could reduce the value of our carried interest in respect of such companies. The framework could also reduce the top marginal tax rate on corporations from 35% to 28%. The framework also suggests that some entities currently treated as partnerships for tax purposes could be subject to an entity-level income tax similar to the corporate income tax. If such a proposal caused us to be subject to additional entity-level taxes, it could reduce cash available for distribution to unitholders or for other uses by us. The framework reiterates the President's support for treatment of carried interest as ordinary income, as provided in the President's revenue proposal for 2013 described above. However,

38

Table of Contents

whether the President's framework will actually be enacted by the government is unknown, and the ultimate consequences of tax reform legislation, if any, are also presently not known.

        The House of Representatives has also proposed the migration of the United States from a "worldwide" system of taxation, pursuant to which U.S. corporations are taxed on their worldwide income, to a territorial tax system where U.S. corporations are taxed only on their U.S. source income (subject to certain exceptions for income derived in low-tax jurisdictions from the exploitation of intangible assets) at a top corporate tax rate that would be 25%. The territorial tax system proposals envisage a revenue neutral result and consequently include revenue raisers to offset the reduction in the tax rate and base which may or may not be detrimental to the value of our common units. Whether these proposals will be enacted by the government and in what form is unknown, as are the ultimate consequences of the proposed legislation.

We depend on our founders and other key personnel, the loss of whose services could have a material adverse effect on our business, results and financial condition.

        We depend on the efforts, skills, reputations and business contacts of our principals, including our founders, Henry Kravis and George Roberts, and other key personnel, the information and deal flow they and others generate during the normal course of their activities and the synergies among the diverse fields of expertise and knowledge held by our professionals. Accordingly, our success depends on the continued service of these individuals, who are not obligated to remain employed with us. The loss of the services of any of them could have a material adverse effect on our revenues, net income and cash flows and could harm our ability to maintain or grow AUM in existing funds or raise additional funds in the future.

        Our principals and other key personnel possess substantial experience and expertise and have strong business relationships with investors in our funds and other members of the business community. As a result, the loss of these personnel could jeopardize our relationships with investors in our funds and members of the business community and result in the reduction of AUM or fewer investment opportunities. For example, if any of our principals were to join or form a competing firm, our business, results and financial condition could suffer.

        Furthermore, the agreements governing our private equity funds and certain non-private equity investment funds managed by us provide that in the event certain "key persons" in these funds (for example, both of Messrs. Kravis and Roberts for our private equity funds, and, in the case of certain geographically or product focused funds, one or more of the executives focused on such funds) generally cease to actively manage a fund, investors in the fund will be entitled to: (i) in the case of our private equity funds, reduce, in whole or in part, their capital commitments available for further investments; and (ii) in the case of certain of our fixed income or other non-private equity investment funds, withdraw all or any portion of their capital accounts, in each case on an investor-by-investor basis (which could lead possibly to a liquidation of those funds). The occurrence of such an event would likely have a significant negative impact on our revenue, net income and cash flow.

If we cannot retain and motivate our principals and other key personnel and recruit, retain and motivate new principals and other key personnel, our business, results and financial condition could be adversely affected.

        Our most important asset is our people, and our continued success is highly dependent upon the efforts of our principals and other professionals, and to a substantial degree on our ability to retain and motivate our principals and other key personnel and to strategically recruit, retain and motivate new talented personnel, including new principals. However, we may not be successful in these efforts as the market for qualified investment professionals is extremely competitive. Our ability to recruit, retain and motivate our professionals is dependent on our ability to offer highly attractive incentive opportunities. If legislation, such as the legislation proposed in April 2009 (and reproposed in 2010 and 2012) were to be enacted, income and gains recognized with respect to carried interest would be treated for U.S.

39

Table of Contents

federal income tax purposes as ordinary income rather than as capital gain. Such legislation would materially increase the amount of taxes that we, our principals and other professionals would be required to pay, thereby adversely affecting our ability to offer such attractive incentive opportunities. See "—Risks Related to U.S. Taxation". In addition, there are pending laws and regulations that seek to regulate the compensation of certain of our employees. See "—Extensive Regulation of our business affects our activities and creates the potential for significant liabilities and penalties. The possibility of increased regulatory focus or legislative or regulatory changes could result in additional burdens on our business." The loss of even a small number of our investment professionals could jeopardize the performance of our funds and other investment products, which would have a material adverse effect on our results of operations. Efforts to retain or attract investment professionals may result in significant additional expenses, which could adversely affect our profitability.

        Many of our principals hold interests in our business through KKR Holdings. These individuals currently receive financial benefits from our business in the form of distributions and amounts funded by KKR Holdings and through their direct and indirect participation in the value of KKR Group Partnership Units held by KKR Holdings. While all of our employees and our principals receive base salaries from us, profit-based cash amounts for certain individuals currently are borne by KKR Holdings from cash reserves based upon distributions on a portion of KKR Group Partnership Units held by KKR Holdings. There can be no assurance that KKR Holdings will have sufficient cash available to continue to make profit-based cash payments and we expect to pay a portion, or eventually all, of these cash bonus payments as KKR Holdings becomes unable to reserve cash for bonus compensation as our principals who hold equity interests through KKR Holdings become entitled to the cash distributions on the KKR Group Partnership Units held by KKR Holdings.

        Moreover, in connection with the KPE Transaction, we made large grants of KKR Holdings units that vest in installments over a five year period commencing October 1, 2009. Our principals may also receive additional equity interests in our business through equity awards granted by KKR Holdings, which does not cause any dilution. However, we have granted and will grant some or all of the types of equity awards historically granted by KKR Holdings from our Equity Incentive Plan, which has caused dilution. In addition, we may be unwilling to grant our employees additional significant equity awards in our business, whether before or even after all of the KKR Holdings units granted in October 2009 vest, and the value of the grants and distributions they receive in respect of their existing awards may be lower than anticipated. This may limit our ability to attract, retain and motivate talented personnel. In order to recruit and retain existing and future investment professionals, we may need to increase the level of compensation that we pay to them, which may cause a higher percentage of our revenue to be paid out in the form of compensation, which would have an adverse impact on our profit margins.

        In addition, there is no guarantee that the confidentiality and restrictive covenant agreements to which our principals are subject, together with our other arrangements with them, will prevent them from leaving us, joining our competitors or otherwise competing with us or that these agreements will be enforceable in all cases. These agreements will expire after a certain period of time, at which point each of our principals would be free to compete against us and solicit investors in our funds, clients and employees. Depending on which entity is a party to these agreements and/or the laws applicable to them, we may not be able to enforce them or become subject to lawsuits or other claims, and certain of these agreements might be waived, modified or amended at any time without our consent. See "Certain Relationships and Related Transactions, and Director Independence—Confidentiality and Restrictive Covenant Agreements."

        We strive to maintain a work environment that reinforces our culture of collaboration, motivation and alignment of interests with fund investors. If we do not continue to develop and implement the right processes and tools to manage our changing enterprise and maintain our culture, our ability to compete successfully and achieve our business objectives could be impaired, which could negatively impact our business, financial condition and results of operations.

40

Table of Contents

Operational risks may disrupt our businesses, result in losses or limit our growth.

        We rely heavily on our financial, accounting and other data processing systems. If any of these systems do not operate properly or are disabled, we could suffer financial loss, a disruption of our businesses, liability to our funds, regulatory intervention or reputational damage. In addition, we operate in businesses that are highly dependent on information systems and technology. Our information systems and technology may not continue to be able to accommodate our growth, may be subject to security risks, and the cost of maintaining such systems may increase from our current level. Such a failure to accommodate growth, or an increase in costs related to such information systems, could have a material adverse effect on our business. Furthermore, we depend on our principal offices in New York City, where most of our administrative personnel are located, for the continued operation of our business. A disaster or a disruption in the infrastructure that supports our businesses, including a disruption involving electronic communications or other services used by us or third parties with whom we conduct business, or directly affecting our principal offices, could have a material adverse impact on our ability to continue to operate our business without interruption. Our business continuation or disaster recovery programs may not be sufficient to mitigate the harm that may result from such a disaster or disruption. In addition, insurance and other safeguards might only partially reimburse us for our losses, if at all. Our operations rely on the secure processing, storage and transmission of confidential and other information in our computer systems and networks. Although we take protective measures and endeavor to modify them as circumstances warrant, our computer systems, software and networks may be vulnerable to unauthorized access, theft, misuse, computer viruses or other malicious code and other events that could have a security impact. If one or more of such events occur, this potentially could jeopardize our or our fund investors' or counterparties' confidential and other information processed and stored in, and transmitted through, our computer systems and networks, or otherwise cause interruptions or malfunctions in our, our fund investors', our counterparties' or third parties' operations, which could result in significant losses, increased costs or reputational damage. Finally, we rely on third party service providers for certain aspects of our business, including for certain information systems, technology, administration, tax and compliance matters. Any interruption or deterioration in the performance of these third parties could impair the quality of our and our funds' operations and could impact our reputation and adversely affect our businesses and limit our ability to grow.

Our organizational documents do not limit our ability to enter into new lines of businesses, and we may expand into new investment strategies, geographic markets and businesses, each of which may result in additional risks and uncertainties in our businesses.

        We intend, to the extent that market conditions warrant, to seek to grow our businesses by increasing AUM in existing businesses, pursuing new investment strategies, including investment opportunities in new asset classes, developing new types of investment structures and products (such as managed accounts and structured products), and expanding into new geographic markets and businesses. We have in recent years opened offices in Asia and the Middle East, and also developed a capital markets business in the United States, Europe, the Middle East and Asia-Pacific, which we intend to grow and diversify. We have also launched a number of new investment initiatives in areas such as real estate, oil and gas, infrastructure and hedge funds. We have and may continue to pursue growth through acquisitions of other investment management companies, acquisitions of critical business partners, strategic partnerships or other strategic initiatives, which may include entering into new lines of business. In addition, we expect opportunities will arise to acquire other alternative or traditional investment managers. To the extent we make strategic investments or acquisitions, undertake other strategic initiatives or enter into a new line of business, we will face numerous risks and uncertainties, including risks associated with:

•

the required investment of capital and other resources;

41

Table of Contents

•

the possibility that we have insufficient expertise to engage in such activities profitably or without incurring inappropriate amounts of risk or liability or have not appropriated planned for such activities;



•

the possibility of diversion of management's attention from our core business;



•

the possibility of disruption of our ongoing business;



•

combining, integrating or developing operational and management systems and controls;



•

potential increase in concentration of the investors in our funds;



•

disagreements with joint venture partners or other stakeholders in strategic partnerships; and



•

the broadening of our geographic footprint, including the risks associated with conducting operations in foreign jurisdictions, including taxation.

        Entry into certain lines of business may subject us to new laws and regulations with which we are not familiar, or from which we are currently exempt, and may lead to increased litigation and regulatory risk. If a new business generates insufficient revenues or if we are unable to efficiently manage our expanded operations, our results of operations will be adversely affected. Our strategic initiatives may include joint ventures, in which case we will be subject to additional risks and uncertainties in that we may be dependent upon, and subject to liability, losses or reputational damage relating to, systems, controls and personnel that are not under our control.

We may not be successful in executing upon or managing the complexities of new investment strategies, markets and businesses, which could adversely affect our business, results of operations and financial condition.

        Our growth strategy is based, in part, on the expansion of our platform through selective investment in, and development or acquisition of, businesses and investment strategies complementary to our business. The expansion into new products and geographies has demanded greater management attention and dedication of resources to manage the increasing complexity of operations and regulatory compliance. This growth strategy involves a number of risks, including the risk that the expected synergies from a newly developed product or strategic alliance will not be realized, that the expected results will not be achieved, that new strategies are not appropriately planned for or integrated into the firm, that the new strategies may conflict, detract from or compete against our existing businesses, that the investment process, controls and procedures that we have developed around our existing platform will prove insufficient or inadequate or that our information systems and technology, including related security systems, may prove to be inadequate. For example, the offering of investment products to retail investors, including our funds registered under the 1940 Act, may result in increased compliance and litigation costs. We may also incur significant charges in connection with such investments, which ultimately may result in significant losses and costs. Such losses could adversely impact our business, results of operations and financial condition, as well as do harm to our professional reputation.

If we are unable to syndicate the securities or indebtedness or realize returns on investments financed with our principal assets, our liquidity, business, results of operations and financial condition could be adversely affected.

        Our principal assets provide us with a significant source of capital to grow and expand our business, increase our participation in our transactions and underwrite commitments in our capital markets business. Our principal assets have provided a source of capital to underwrite loans, securities or other financial instruments, which we generally expect to syndicate to third parties. To the extent that we are unable to do so, we may be required to sell such investments at a significant loss or hold them indefinitely. If we are required to retain investments on our balance sheet for an extended period of time, the inability of our capital markets business to complete additional transactions would impair

42

Table of Contents

our results. In addition, as our principal assets have been a significant source of financing for new strategies, to the extent that such strategies are not successful or our principal assets cease to provide adequate liquidity, we would be limited in our ability to seed new businesses or support our existing business as effectively as contemplated.

Extensive regulation of our businesses affects our activities and creates the potential for significant liabilities and penalties. The possibility of increased regulatory focus or legislative or regulatory changes could adversely affect our business.

        Our business is subject to extensive regulation. We are subject to regulation, including periodic examinations, by governmental and self-regulatory organizations in the jurisdictions in which we operate around the world. Many of these regulators, including U.S. and foreign government agencies and self-regulatory organizations, are empowered to conduct investigations and administrative proceedings that can result in fines, suspensions of personnel or other sanctions, including censure, the issuance of cease-and-desist orders or the suspension or expulsion of applicable licenses and memberships. Even if an investigation or proceeding does not result in a sanction or the sanction imposed against us or our personnel by a regulator were small in monetary amount, the adverse publicity relating to the investigation, proceeding or imposition of these sanctions could harm our reputation and cause us to lose existing clients and fund investors or fail to gain new clients and fund investors.

        As a result of market disruptions in the past years as well as highly publicized financial scandals, regulators and fund investors exhibited concerns over the integrity of the U.S. and global financial markets. In response, regulators in the United States and elsewhere launched programs of regulatory reform that have broad implications for us and for our funds, as well as for many of the markets in which we and they operate. In addition, the private equity industry has come under increased political, regulatory and news media scrutiny with politicians, governmental officials, and regulators focusing on the taxation of carried interest and the private equity industry's allocation of expenses to the funds and valuation practices. Any changes in the regulatory framework applicable to our business, including the changes and potential changes described below, as well as adverse news media attention, may impose additional expenses or capital requirements on us, limit our fundraising for our investment products, result in limitations in the manner in which our business is conducted, have an adverse impact upon our financial condition, results of operations or prospects, impair executive retention or recruitment and require substantial attention by senior management. It is impossible to determine the extent of the impact of any new laws, regulations or initiatives that may be proposed or may become law on our business or the markets in which we operate. If enacted, any new regulation or regulatory framework could negatively impact our funds and us in a number of ways, including increasing our costs and the cost for our funds of investing, borrowing or hedging, increasing the funds' or our regulatory costs, imposing additional burdens on the funds' or our staff, and potentially requiring the disclosure of sensitive information. In addition, we may be adversely affected by changes in the interpretation or enforcement of existing laws and rules by these governmental authorities and self-regulatory organizations. New laws or regulations could make compliance more difficult or more expensive or affect the manner in which we conduct business. Moreover, we anticipate the potential for an increase in regulatory investigations and new or enhanced reporting requirements of the trading and other investment activities of alternative investment management funds and firms, including our funds and us. Such investigations and reporting obligations will likely impose additional expenses on us, may require the attention of senior management and increase the complexity of managing our business and may result in fines if we or any of our funds are deemed to have violated any regulations.

        There have been a number of legislative or regulatory proposals affecting the financial sector in the United States. In particular, the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, or

43

Table of Contents

Dodd-Frank Act, that President Obama signed into law on July 21, 2010, creates a significant amount of new regulation. The Dodd-Frank Act:

•

establishes the Financial Stability Oversight Council, or FSOC, a federal agency charged with, among other things, designating systemically important nonbank financial companies for heightened prudential supervision and making recommendations regarding the imposition of enhanced standards regarding capital, leverage, conflicts and other requirements for financial firms deemed to pose a systemic threat to the financial stability of the U.S. economy;



•

requires private equity and hedge fund advisers to register with the SEC under the Investment Advisers Act (as described elsewhere in this report, Kohlberg Kravis Roberts & Co. L.P. and its wholly-owned subsidiaries KKR Asset Management LLC and Prisma Capital Partners LP are registered with the SEC as investment advisers under the Investment Advisers Act), to maintain extensive records and to file reports if deemed necessary for purposes of systemic risk assessment by certain governmental bodies;



•

authorizes federal regulatory agencies to review and, in certain cases, prohibit compensation arrangements at financial institutions that give employees incentives to engage in conduct deemed to encourage inappropriate risk taking by covered financial institutions;



•

requires public companies to adopt and disclose policies requiring, in the event the company is required to issue an accounting restatement, the clawback of related incentive compensation from current and former executive officers;



•

restricts the ability of banking organizations to sponsor or invest in private equity and hedge funds;



•

grants the U.S. government resolution authority to liquidate or take emergency measures with regard to troubled financial institutions that fall outside the existing resolution authority of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, or FDIC; and



•

creates a Consumer Financial Protection Bureau within the U.S. Federal Reserve.