Macerich - 10-K annual report

THE MACERICH COMPANY

Annual Report on Form 10-K

For the Year Ended December 31, 2005

INDEX

Part I

Item 1. Business

General

The Macerich Company (the "Company") is involved in the acquisition, ownership, development, redevelopment, management, and leasing of regional and community shopping centers located throughout the United States. The Company is the sole general partner of, and owns a majority of the ownership interests in, The Macerich Partnership, L.P., a Delaware limited partnership (the "Operating Partnership"). As of December 31, 2005, the Operating Partnership owned or had an ownership interest in 75 regional shopping centers, 20 community shopping centers and two development properties aggregating approximately 78.9 million square feet of gross leasable area ("GLA"). These 97 regional, community and development shopping centers are referred to hereinafter as the "Centers", unless the context otherwise requires. The Company is a self-administered and self-managed real estate investment trust ("REIT") and conducts all of its operations through the Operating Partnership and the Company's management companies, Macerich Property Management Company, LLC, a single-member Delaware limited liability company, Macerich Management Company, a California corporation, Westcor Partners, LLC, a single member Arizona limited liability company, Macerich Westcor Management, LLC, a single member Delaware limited liability company and Westcor Partners of Colorado, LLC, a Colorado limited liability company. As part of the Wilmorite acquisition (See Recent Developments—Acquisitions), the Company acquired MACW Mall Management, Inc., a New York corporation and MACW Property Management, LLC, a New York limited liability company. These two management companies are collectively referred to herein as the "Wilmorite Management Companies." The three Westcor management companies are collectively referred herein as the "Westcor Management Companies." All seven of the management companies are collectively referred to herein as the "Management Companies."

The Company was organized as a Maryland corporation in September 1993 to continue and expand the shopping center operations of Mace Siegel, Arthur M. Coppola, Dana K. Anderson and Edward C. Coppola (the "principals") and certain of their business associates.

All references to the Company in this Form 10-K include the Company, those entities owned or controlled by the Company and predecessors of the Company, unless the context indicates otherwise.

Recent Developments

Equity Offering

On January 19, 2006, the Company issued 10,952,381 common shares for net proceeds of $747.0 million. The proceeds from issuance of the shares were used to pay off the $619.0 million acquisition loan from the Wilmorite acquisition and to pay down a portion of the Company's line of credit pending use to pay part of the purchase price for Valley River Center (See Acquisitions).

Acquisitions

On February 1, 2006, the Company acquired Valley River Center, a 916,000 square foot super-regional mall in Eugene, Oregon. The total purchase price was $187.5 million and concurrent with the acquisition, the

The Macerich Company    1

Company placed a $100.0 million loan bearing interest at a fixed rate of 5.58% on the property. The balance of the purchase price was funded by cash and borrowings under the Company's line of credit.

On January 11, 2005, the Company became a 15% owner in a joint venture that acquired Metrocenter, a 1.3 million square foot super-regional mall in Phoenix, Arizona. The total purchase price was $160 million and concurrently with the acquisition, the joint venture placed a $112 million floating rate loan on the property. The Company's share of the purchase price, net of the debt, was $7.2 million which was funded by cash and borrowings under the Company's line of credit.

On January 21, 2005, the Company formed a 50/50 joint venture with a private investment company. The joint venture acquired a 49% interest in Kierland Commons, a 437,000 square foot mixed use center in Phoenix, Arizona. The joint venture's purchase price for the interest in the property was $49.0 million. The Company assumed its share of the underlying property debt and funded the remainder of its share of the purchase price by cash and borrowings under the Company's line of credit.

On April 8, 2005, the Company acquired Ridgmar Mall, a 1.3 million square foot super-regional mall in Fort Worth, Texas. The acquisition was completed in a 50/50 joint venture with an affiliate of Walton Street Capital, LLC. The purchase price was $71.1 million. Concurrent with the closing, a $57.4 million loan bearing interest at a fixed rate of 6.07% was placed on the property. The balance of the purchase price was funded by borrowings under the Company's line of credit.

On April 25, 2005, the Company and the Operating Partnership completed its acquisition of Wilmorite Properties, Inc., a Delaware corporation ("Wilmorite") and Wilmorite Holdings, L.P., a Delaware limited partnership ("Wilmorite Holdings"). Wilmorite's portfolio includes interests in 11 regional malls and two open-air community shopping centers with 13.4 million square feet of space located in Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Kentucky and Virginia. The total purchase price was approximately $2.333 billion, plus adjustments for working capital, including the assumption of approximately $877.2 million of existing debt with an average interest rate of 6.43% and the issuance of $234 million of convertible preferred units ("CPUs") and $5.8 million of common units in Wilmorite Holdings. The balance of the consideration to the equity holders of Wilmorite and Wilmorite Holdings was paid in cash, which was provided primarily by a five-year, $450 million term loan bearing interest at LIBOR plus 1.50% and a $650 million acquisition loan with a term of up to two years and bearing interest initially at LIBOR plus 1.60%. An affiliate of the Operating Partnership is the general partner and, together with other affiliates, own approximately 83% of Wilmorite Holdings, with the remaining 17% held by those limited partners of Wilmorite Holdings who elected to receive CPUs or common units in Wilmorite Holdings rather than cash. Approximately $213 million of the CPUs can be redeemed, subject to certain conditions, for the portion of the Wilmorite portfolio generally located in the area of Rochester, New York.

Financing Activity

Concurrent with the Wilmorite closing, the Company modified its $250 million unsecured term loan. The interest rate was reduced from LIBOR plus 2.50% to LIBOR plus 1.50%.

Concurrent with the Wilmorite closing, the Company obtained a five-year $450 million term loan bearing interest at LIBOR plus 1.50% and a $650 million acquisition loan with a term of up to two years and bearing

2     The Macerich Company

interest initially at LIBOR plus 1.60%. The outstanding $619.0 million balance of this acquisition loan was paid off in full with the net proceeds of the Company's common stock offering on January 19, 2006 (See Equity Offering). The $450 million term loan has an interest rate swap agreement which effectively fixes the interest rate at 6.296% (4.796% swap rate plus 1.50%) from December 1, 2005 to April 15, 2010.

On May 20, 2005, the Company's joint venture in Lakewood Mall refinanced the loan on the property. The original loan of $127 million at an average interest rate of 7.1% was replaced with a ten-year $250 million loan bearing interest at 5.41%. The Company's share of the loan proceeds were used to pay down its line of credit.

On October 3, 2005, the Company obtained a 10-year $37 million fixed rate loan bearing interest at 4.97% at Flagstaff Mall. The proceeds were used to payoff the existing $13.0 million loan which had an interest rate of 7.8%. The balance of the loan proceeds were used to pay down the Company's line of credit.

On October 4, 2005, the Company's joint venture in Camelback Colonnade obtained a $41.5 million two-year loan bearing interest at LIBOR plus 0.69% on the property. The proceeds were used to pay off the existing $30.7 million loan which had an interest rate of 7.5%. The Company's share of the remaining loan proceeds were used to pay down the Company's line of credit.

On November 9, 2005, the Company refinanced the $72.0 million loan on Greece Ridge Mall. The interest rate was reduced from LIBOR plus 2.625% to LIBOR plus 0.65%.

On September 22, 2005, the Company's joint venture in Scottsdale 101 modified its construction loan and obtained an additional $16.0 million advance, increasing the loan to a $56 million floating-rate loan on the property at a rate of LIBOR plus 1.25%. The Company's share of the loan proceeds were used to pay down the Company's line of credit.

On December 29, 2005, the Company refinanced the loan on Valley View Mall. The old loan of $51.0 million with a fixed rate of 7.89% was replaced with a $125.0 million, five-year fixed rate loan bearing interest at 5.72%. The excess proceeds were used to pay down the Company's line of credit and used for general corporate purposes.

Redevelopment and Development Activity

At Washington Square in suburban Portland, Oregon, the Company had a grand opening on November 18, 2005 of a lifestyle oriented expansion project which consists of the addition of 76,000 square feet of shop space. In addition, an agreement has been reached with Mervyn's to recapture its 100,000 square foot location. The Company plans to recycle that square footage over the next two years.

At Fresno Fashion Fair, an 87,000 square foot lifestyle center expansion to the existing mall continues on schedule. The first phase, which included The Cheesecake Factory, opened on December 3, 2005. Completion of the balance of the project is expected in Summer 2006.

Construction continues on the Twenty Ninth Street project, a signature, outdoor retail development on 62 acres in the heart of Boulder, Colorado. Retail tenants include Ann Taylor Loft, Apple, Bath and Body Works,

The Macerich Company    3

Clark's Shoes, Puma, JJill, Victoria Secret, and White House/Black Market joining anchors Macy's department store, Wild Oats, Home Depot, and Century Theatres and an array of additional specialty stores and restaurants. Twenty Ninth Street is scheduled to open in phases starting in the Fall 2006.

Construction will begin in the first quarter of 2006 on the SanTan Village regional shopping center in Gilbert, Arizona. The center is an outdoor open air streetscape project planned to contain in excess of 1.5 million square feet on 120 acres. The center will be anchored by Dillard's, Harkins Theatres and will contain a lifestyle shopping district featuring retail, office, residential and restaurants. It is also anticipated that an additional department store will also anchor this center. The project is scheduled to open in phases starting in Fall 2007 with all phases completed by 2008.

Dispositions

On January 5, 2005, the Company sold the Arizona Lifestyle Galleries for $4.3 million. The sale resulted in a gain on sale of asset of $0.3 million.

The Shopping Center Industry

General

There are several types of retail shopping centers, which are differentiated primarily based on size and marketing strategy. Regional shopping centers generally contain in excess of 400,000 square feet of GLA and are typically anchored by two or more department or large retail stores ("Anchors") and are referred to as "Regional Shopping Centers" or "Malls". Regional Shopping Centers also typically contain numerous diversified retail stores ("Mall Stores"), most of which are national or regional retailers typically located along corridors connecting the Anchors. Community Shopping Centers, also referred to as "strip centers" or "urban villages" or "specialty centers" are retail shopping centers that are designed to attract local or neighborhood customers and are typically anchored by one or more supermarkets, discount department stores and/or drug stores. Community Shopping Centers typically contain 100,000 square feet to 400,000 square feet of GLA. In addition, freestanding retail stores are located along the perimeter of the shopping centers ("Freestanding Stores"). Anchors, Mall and Freestanding Stores and other tenants typically contribute funds for the maintenance of the common areas, property taxes, insurance, advertising and other expenditures related to the operation of the shopping center.

Regional Shopping Centers

A Regional Shopping Center draws from its trade area by offering a variety of fashion merchandise, hard goods and services and entertainment, often in an enclosed, climate controlled environment with convenient parking. Regional Shopping Centers provide an array of retail shops and entertainment facilities and often serve as the town center and the preferred gathering place for community, charity, and promotional events.

Regional Shopping Centers have generally provided owners with relatively stable growth in income despite the cyclical nature of the retail business. This stability is due both to the diversity of tenants and to the typical dominance of Regional Shopping Centers in their trade areas.

Regional Shopping Centers have different strategies with regard to price, merchandise offered and tenant mix, and are generally tailored to meet the needs of their trade areas. Anchor tenants are located along common

4     The Macerich Company

areas in a configuration designed to maximize consumer traffic for the benefit of the Mall Stores. Mall GLA, which generally refers to gross leasable area contiguous to the Anchors for tenants other than Anchors, is leased to a wide variety of smaller retailers. Mall Stores typically account for the majority of the revenues of a Regional Shopping Center.

Business of the Company

The Company has a four-pronged business strategy which focuses on the acquisition, leasing and management, redevelopment and development of Regional Shopping Centers.

Acquisitions.    The Company focuses on well-located, quality regional shopping centers that are, or it believes can be dominant in their trade area and have strong revenue enhancement potential. The Company subsequently seeks to improve operating performance and returns from these properties through leasing, management and redevelopment. Since its initial public offering, the Company has acquired interests in shopping centers nationwide. The Company believes that it is geographically well positioned to cultivate and maintain ongoing relationships with potential sellers and financial institutions and to act quickly when acquisition opportunities arise. (See "Recent Developments—Acquisitions").

Leasing and Management.    The Company believes that the shopping center business requires specialized skills across a broad array of disciplines for effective and profitable operations. For this reason, the Company has developed a fully integrated real estate organization with in-house acquisition, accounting, development, finance, leasing, legal, marketing, property management and redevelopment expertise. In addition, the Company emphasizes a philosophy of decentralized property management, leasing and marketing performed by on-site professionals. The Company believes that this strategy results in the optimal operation, tenant mix and drawing power of each Center as well as the ability to quickly respond to changing competitive conditions of the Center's trade area.

The Company believes that on-site property managers can most effectively operate the Centers. Each Center's property manager is responsible for overseeing the operations, marketing, maintenance and security functions at the Center. Property managers focus special attention on controlling operating costs, a key element in the profitability of the Centers, and seek to develop strong relationships with and to be responsive to the needs of retailers.

Similarly, the Company generally utilizes on-site and regionally located leasing managers to better understand the market and the community in which a Center is located. Leasing managers are charged with more than the responsibility of leasing space. The Company continually assesses and fine tunes each Center's tenant mix, identifies and replaces underperforming tenants and seeks to optimize existing tenant sizes and configurations.

On a selective basis, the Company also does property management and leasing for third parties. The Company currently manages three malls for third party owners on a fee basis. In addition, the Company manages four community centers for a related party. (See—"Item 13—Certain Relationships and Related Transactions").

Redevelopment.    One of the major components of the Company's growth strategy is its ability to redevelop acquired properties. For this reason, the Company has built a staff of redevelopment professionals who have primary responsibility for identifying redevelopment opportunities that will result in enhanced long-term

The Macerich Company    5

financial returns and market position for the Centers. The redevelopment professionals oversee the design and construction of the projects in addition to obtaining required governmental approvals. (See "Recent Developments—Redevelopment and Development Activity").

Development.    The Company is pursuing ground-up development projects on a selective basis. The Company believes it can supplement its strong acquisition, operations and redevelopment skills with its ground-up development expertise to further increase growth opportunities. (See "Recent Developments—Redevelopment and Development Activity").

The Centers

As of December 31, 2005, the Centers consist of 75 Regional Shopping Centers, 20 Community Shopping Centers and two development properties aggregating approximately 78.9 million square feet of GLA. The 75 Regional Shopping Centers in the Company's portfolio average approximately 972,126 square feet of GLA and range in size from 2.2 million square feet of GLA at Tyson's Corner Center to 323,449 square feet of GLA at Panorama Mall. The Company's 20 Community Shopping Centers have an average of 250,511 square feet of GLA. The Centers presently include 310 Anchors totaling approximately 42.0 million square feet of GLA and approximately 10,000 Mall and Freestanding Stores totaling approximately 36.9 million square feet of GLA.

Competition

There are numerous owners and developers of real estate that compete with the Company in its trade areas. There are seven other publicly traded mall companies and several large private mall companies, any of which under certain circumstances could compete against the Company for an acquisition, an Anchor or a tenant. This results in competition for both acquisition of centers and for tenants or Anchors to occupy space. The existence of competing shopping centers could have a material impact on the Company's ability to lease space and on the level of rent that can be achieved. There is also increasing competition from other retail formats and technologies, such as lifestyle centers, power centers, internet shopping and home shopping networks, factory outlet centers, discount shopping clubs and mail-order services that could adversely affect the Company's revenues.

Major Tenants

The Centers derived approximately 94.0% of their total rents for the year ended December 31, 2005 from Mall and Freestanding Stores. One tenant accounted for approximately 4.1% of minimum rents of the Company, and no other single tenant accounted for more than 3.6% as of December 31, 2005.

6     The Macerich Company

The following tenants (including their subsidiaries) represent the 10 largest tenants in the Company's portfolio (including joint ventures) based upon minimum rents in place as of December 31, 2005:

(1)

Includes Cingular Wireless office headquarters located at Redmond Town Center.

(2)

Sun Capital Partners, Inc. owns Musicland Holding Corp. which operates Sam Goody and Suncoast Motion Pictures. On February 1, 2006, Musicland Holding Corp. announced the closure of 341 of its low performing Sam Goody and Suncoast Picture Stores which include 26 stores in the Centers.

(3)

Federated Department Stores, Inc. disclosed that it has identified duplicate locations in certain malls which will be divested during 2006. Eleven of the identified stores are located in 10 of the Centers.

Mall and Freestanding Stores

Mall and Freestanding Store leases generally provide for tenants to pay rent comprised of a fixed base (or "minimum") rent and a percentage rent based on sales. In some cases, tenants pay only a fixed minimum rent, and in some cases, tenants pay only percentage rents. Historically, most leases for Mall and Freestanding Stores contain provisions that allow the Centers to recover their costs for maintenance of the common areas, property taxes, insurance, advertising and other expenditures related to the operations of the Center. The Company generally enters into leases which require tenants to pay a stated amount for such operating expenses, generally excluding property taxes, regardless of the expenses the Company actually incurs at any Center.

Tenant space of 10,000 square feet and under in the portfolio at December 31, 2005 comprises 68.9% of all Mall and Freestanding Store space. The Company uses tenant spaces of 10,000 square feet and under for comparing rental rate activity. The Company believes that to include space over 10,000 square feet would provide a less meaningful comparison.

The Macerich Company    7

When an existing lease expires, the Company is often able to enter into a new lease with a higher base rent component. The average base rent for new Mall and Freestanding Store leases at the consolidated Centers, 10,000 square feet and under, commencing during 2005 was $35.60 per square foot, or 15.9% higher than the average base rent for all Mall and Freestanding Stores at the consolidated Centers, 10,000 square feet and under, expiring during 2005 of $30.71 per square foot.

The following tables set forth for the Centers, the average base rent per square foot of Mall and Freestanding GLA, for tenants 10,000 square feet and under, as of December 31 for each of the past three years:

(1)

Average base rent per square foot is based on Mall and Freestanding Store GLA for spaces, 10,000 square feet and under, occupied as of December 31 for each of the Centers owned by the Company in 2003, 2004 and 2005.

(2)

The average base rent on lease signings commencing during the year represents the actual rent to be paid on a per square foot basis during the first twelve months. Lease signings for the expansion area of Queens Center and La Encantada are excluded.

(3)

The average base rent per square foot on leases expiring during the year represents the final year minimum rent, on a cash basis, for all tenant leases 10,000 square feet and under expiring during the year.

Cost of Occupancy

The Company's management believes that in order to maximize the Company's operating cash flow, the Centers' Mall Store tenants must be able to operate profitably. A major factor contributing to tenant

8     The Macerich Company

profitability is cost of occupancy. The following tables summarize occupancy costs for Mall Store tenants in the Centers as a percentage of total Mall Store sales for the last three years:

(1)

Represents real estate tax and common area maintenance charges.

Lease Expirations

The following tables show scheduled lease expirations (for Centers owned as of December 31, 2005) of Mall and Freestanding Stores (10,000 square feet and under) for the next ten years, assuming that none of the tenants exercise renewal options:

The Macerich Company    9

(1)

Currently, 37% of leases have provisions for future consumer price index increases which are not reflected in ending lease rent.

(2)

For leases 10,000 square feet and under.

Anchors

Anchors have traditionally been a major factor in the public's identification with Regional Shopping Centers. Anchors are generally department stores whose merchandise appeals to a broad range of shoppers. Although the Centers receive a smaller percentage of their operating income from Anchors than from Mall and Freestanding Stores, strong Anchors play an important part in maintaining customer traffic and making the Centers desirable locations for Mall and Freestanding Store tenants.

Anchors either own their stores, the land under them and in some cases adjacent parking areas, or enter into long-term leases with an owner at rates that are lower than the rents charged to tenants of Mall and Freestanding Stores. Each Anchor, which owns its own store, and certain Anchors which lease their stores, enter into reciprocal easement agreements with the owner of the Center covering among other things, operational matters, initial construction and future expansion.

Anchors accounted for approximately 6.0% of the Company's total rent for the year ended December 31, 2005.

10     The Macerich Company

The following table identifies each Anchor, each parent company that owns multiple Anchors and the number of square feet owned or leased by each such Anchor or parent company in the Company's portfolio at December 31, 2005:

(1)

Federated Department Stores, Inc. disclosed that it has identified duplicate locations in certain malls which will be divested during 2006. Eleven of the identified stores are located in 10 of the Centers.

(2)

Dillard's completed a 58,000 square foot expansion at Green Tree Mall in March 2005.

(3)

Nordstrom opened a new 200,000 square foot store at NorthPark Center in November 2005.

The Macerich Company    11

(4)

The Bon-Ton Stores, Inc. has acquired Herberger's and Younkers from Saks Incorporated in a transaction completed in March 2006. Herberger's completed a 42,000 square foot expansion at Rimrock Mall in October 2005. The Bon-Ton stores at Great Northern Mall and Shoppingtown Mall closed in January 2006.

(5)

At Washington Square, an agreement has been reached with Mervyn's to recapture its 100,000 square foot location. The Company plans to recycle that square footage over the next two years.

(6)

Target opened a new 116,000 square foot store at Valley Mall in October 2005.

(7)

Home Depot opened a new 141,000 square foot store at Twenty Ninth Street in January 2006.

(8)

Wal-Mart opened a 206,527 square foot store at San Tan Village in January 2005.

Environmental Matters

Each of the Centers has been subjected to a Phase I audit (which involves review of publicly available information and general property inspections, but does not involve soil sampling or ground water analysis) completed by an environmental consultant.

Based on these audits, and on other information, the Company is aware of the following environmental issues that may reasonably result in costs associated with future investigation or remediation, or in environmental liability:

•

Asbestos. The Company has conducted asbestos-containing materials ("ACM") surveys at various locations within the Centers. The surveys indicate that ACMs are present or suspected in certain areas, primarily vinyl floor tiles, mastics, roofing materials, drywall tape and joint compounds. The identified ACMs are generally non-friable, in good condition, and possess low probabilities for disturbance. At certain Centers where ACMs are present or suspected, however, some ACMs have been or may be classified as "friable," and ultimately may require removal under certain conditions. The Company has developed and implemented an operations and maintenance ("O&M") plan to manage ACMs in place.



•

Underground Storage Tanks. Underground storage tanks ("USTs") are or were present at certain of the Centers, often in connection with tenant operations at gasoline stations or automotive tire, battery and accessory service centers located at such Centers. USTs also may be or have been present at properties neighboring certain Centers. Some of these tanks have either leaked or are suspected to have leaked. Where leakage has occurred, investigation, remediation, and monitoring costs may be incurred by the Company if responsible current or former tenants, or other responsible parties, are unavailable to pay such costs.



•

Chlorinated Hydrocarbons. The presence of chlorinated hydrocarbons such as perchloroethylene ("PCE") and its degradation byproducts have been detected at certain of the Centers, often in connection with tenant dry cleaning operations. Where PCE has been detected, the Company may incur investigation, remediation and monitoring costs if responsible current or former tenants, or other responsible parties, are unavailable to pay such costs.

PCE has been detected in soil and groundwater in the vicinity of a dry cleaning establishment at North Valley Plaza, formerly owned by a joint venture of which the Company was a 50% member. The property was sold on December 18, 1997. The California Department of Toxic Substances Control ("DTSC") advised the

12     The Macerich Company

Company in 1995 that very low levels of Dichloroethylene ("1,2 DCE"), a degradation byproduct of PCE, had been detected in a municipal water well located ¹/4 mile west of the dry cleaners, and that the dry cleaning facility may have contributed to the introduction of 1,2 DCE into the water well. According to the DTSC, the maximum contaminant level ("MCL") for 1,2 DCE which is permitted in drinking water is 6 parts per billion ("ppb"). The 1,2 DCE was detected in the water well at a concentration of 1.2 ppb, which is below the MCL. In 1998, DTSC issued an order to multiple responsible parties regarding this contamination. The Company has retained an environmental consultant and has initiated extensive testing of the site. The joint venture agreed (between itself and the buyer) that it would be responsible for continuing to pursue the investigation and remediation of impacted soil and groundwater resulting from releases of PCE from the former dry cleaner. A total of $0.1 million and $0.1 million have already been incurred by the joint venture for remediation, professional and legal fees for the years ended December 31, 2005 and 2004, respectively. The Company has been sharing costs with former owners of the property. A minimal amount remains reserved at December 31, 2005.

The Company acquired Fresno Fashion Fair in December 1996. Asbestos was detected in structural fireproofing throughout much of the Center. Testing data conducted by professional environmental consulting firms indicates that the fireproofing is largely inaccessible to building occupants and is well adhered to the structural members. Additionally, airborne concentrations of asbestos were well within OSHA's permissible exposure limit of .1 fcc. The accounting at acquisition included a reserve of $3.3 million to cover future removal of this asbestos, as necessary. The Center was recently renovated and a substantial amount of the asbestos was removed. The Company incurred $0.5 million and $0.1 million in remediation costs for the years ended December 31, 2005 and 2004, respectively. An additional $1.2 million remains reserved at December 31, 2005.

Insurance

Each of the Centers has comprehensive liability, fire, extended coverage and rental loss insurance with insured limits customarily carried for similar properties. The Company does not insure certain types of losses (such as losses from wars), because they are either uninsurable or not economically insurable. In addition, while the Company or the relevant joint venture, as applicable, carries earthquake insurance on the Centers located in California, the policies are subject to a deductible equal to 5% of the total insured value of each Center, a $100,000 per occurrence minimum and a combined annual aggregate loss limit of $200 million on these Centers. While the Company or the relevant joint venture also carries terrorism insurance on the Centers, the policies are subject to a $10,000 deductible and a combined annual aggregate loss of $800 million for both certified and non-certified acts of terrorism. Each Center has environmental insurance covering eligible third-party losses, remediation and non-owned disposal sites, subject to a $100,000 deductible and a $10 million three-year aggregate limit. Some environmental losses are not covered by this insurance because they are uninsurable or not economically insurable. Furthermore, the Company carries title insurance on substantially all of the Centers for less than their full value.

Qualification as a Real Estate Investment Trust

The Company elected to be taxed as a REIT under the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the "Code"), commencing with its first taxable year ended December 31, 1994, and intends to conduct its operations so as to continue to qualify as a REIT under the Code. As a REIT, the Company generally will not be subject to federal and state income taxes on its net taxable income that it currently distributes to

The Macerich Company    13

stockholders. Qualification and taxation as a REIT depends on the Company's ability to meet certain dividend distribution tests, share ownership requirements and various qualification tests prescribed in the Code.

Employees

As of December 31, 2005, the Company and the management companies employ 2,787 persons, including executive officers (8), personnel in the areas of acquisitions and business development (13), property management (477), leasing (135), redevelopment/development (104), financial services (247) and legal affairs (59). In addition, in an effort to minimize operating costs, the Company generally maintains its own security and guest services staff (1,680) and in some cases maintenance staff (64). The Company primarily engages a third party to handle maintenance at the Centers. Unions represent 18 of these employees. The Company believes that relations with its employees are good.

Available Information; Website Disclosure; Corporate Governance Documents

The Company's corporate website address is www.macerich.com. The Company makes available free-of-charge through this website its reports on Forms 10-K, 10-Q and 8-K and all amendments thereto, as soon as reasonably practicable after the reports have been filed with, or furnished to, the Securities and Exchange Commission. These reports are available under the heading "Investing—SEC Filings," through a free hyperlink to a third-party service.

The following documents relating to Corporate Governance are available on the Company's website at www.macerich.com under "Investing—Corporate Governance":

Guidelines on Corporate Governance
Code of Business Conduct and Ethics
Code of Ethics for CEO and Senior Financial Officers
Audit Committee Charter
Compensation Committee Charter
Executive Committee Charter
Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee Charter

You may also request copies of any of these documents by writing to:

Attention: Corporate Secretary
The Macerich Company
401 North Wilshire Blvd., Suite 700
Santa Monica, CA 90401

14     The Macerich Company

Item 1A. Risk Factors

We invest primarily in shopping centers, which are subject to a number of significant risks that are beyond our control.

Real property investments are subject to varying degrees of risk that may affect the ability of our Centers to generate sufficient revenues to meet operating and other expenses, including debt service, lease payments, capital expenditures and tenant improvements, and to make distributions to us and our stockholders. Centers wholly owned by us are referred to as "Wholly Owned Centers" and Centers that are partly but not wholly owned by us are referred to as "Joint Venture Centers." A number of factors may decrease the income generated by the Centers, including:

•

the national economic climate;



•

the regional and local economy (which may be negatively impacted by plant closings, industry slowdowns, union activity, adverse weather conditions, natural disasters, terrorist activities and other factors);



•

local real estate conditions (such as an oversupply of, or a reduction in demand for, retail space or retail goods, and the availability and creditworthiness of current and prospective tenants);



•

perceptions by retailers or shoppers of the safety, convenience and attractiveness of a Center; and



•

increased costs of maintenance, insurance and operations (including real estate taxes).

Income from shopping center properties and shopping center values are also affected by applicable laws and regulations, including tax, environmental, safety and zoning laws, and by interest rate levels and the availability and cost of financing. In addition, the number of prospective buyers interested in purchasing shopping centers is limited. Therefore, if we were to sell one or more of our Centers, we may receive less money than we originally invested in the Center.

Some of our Centers are geographically concentrated and, as a result, are sensitive to local economic and real estate conditions.

A significant percentage of our Centers are located in California and Arizona and 12 Centers in the aggregate are located in New York, New Jersey and Connecticut. To the extent that weak economic or real estate conditions, including as a result of the factors described in the preceding risk factor, or other factors affect California, Arizona, New York, New Jersey or Connecticut (or their respective regions) more severely than other areas of the country, our financial performance could be negatively impacted.

Our Centers must compete with other retail centers and retail formats for tenants and customers.

There are numerous shopping facilities that compete with the Centers in attracting tenants to lease space, and an increasing number of new retail formats and technologies other than retail shopping centers compete with the Centers for retail sales. Competing retail formats include lifestyle centers, factory outlet centers, power

The Macerich Company    15

centers, discount shopping clubs, mail-order services, internet shopping and home shopping networks. Our revenues may be reduced as a result of increased competition.

Our Centers depend on tenants to generate rental revenues.

Our revenues and funds available for distribution will be reduced if:

•

a significant number of our tenants are unable (due to poor operating results, bankruptcy, terrorist activities or other reasons) to meet their obligations;



•

we are unable to lease a significant amount of space in the Centers on economically favorable terms; or



•

for any other reason, we are unable to collect a significant amount of rental payments.

A decision by an Anchor, or other significant tenant to cease operations at a Center could also have an adverse effect on our financial condition. The closing of an Anchor or other significant tenant may allow other Anchors and/or other tenants to terminate their leases, seek rent relief and/or cease operating their stores at the Center or otherwise adversely affect occupancy at the Center. In addition, Anchors and/or tenants at one or more Centers might terminate their leases as a result of mergers, acquisitions, consolidations, dispositions or bankruptcies in the retail industry. The bankruptcy and /or closure of retail stores, or sale of an Anchor or store to a less desirable retailer, may reduce occupancy levels, customer traffic and rental income, or otherwise adversely affect our financial performance. Furthermore, if the store sales of retailers operating in the Centers decline sufficiently, tenants might be unable to pay their minimum rents or expense recovery charges. In the event of a default by a lessee, the affected Center may experience delays and costs in enforcing its rights as lessor.

For example, on October 24, 2005, Federated Department Stores, Inc. disclosed that it has identified 82 duplicate locations in certain malls which will be divested during 2006. Eleven of the identified stores are located in 10 of our Centers. On February 1, 2006, Musicland Holding Corp. announced the closure of 341 of its low performing Sam Goody and Suncoast Picture Stores which include 26 stores located in the Centers. Retail Brand Alliance has recently closed 26 of its Casual Corner, Petite Sophisticate and August Max stores located in the Centers. No assurances can be given regarding the impact on us of those divestitures or closures if or when they occur.

Our acquisition and real estate development strategies may not be successful.

Our historical growth in revenues, net income and funds from operations has been closely tied to the acquisition and redevelopment of shopping centers. Many factors, including the availability and cost of capital, our total amount of debt outstanding, interest rates and the availability of attractive acquisition targets, among others, will affect our ability to acquire and redevelop additional properties in the future. We may not be successful in pursuing acquisition opportunities, and newly acquired properties may not perform as well as expected. Expenses arising from our efforts to complete acquisitions, redevelop properties or increase our market penetration may have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. We face competition for acquisitions primarily from other REITs, as well as from private

16     The Macerich Company

real estate companies and financial buyers. Some of our competitors have greater financial and other resources. Increased competition for shopping center acquisitions may impact adversely our ability to acquire additional properties on favorable terms. We cannot guarantee that we will be able to implement our growth strategy successfully or manage our expanded operations effectively and profitably.

We may not be able to achieve the anticipated financial and operating results from newly acquired assets. Some of the factors that could affect anticipated results are:

•

Our ability to integrate and manage new properties, including increasing occupancy rates and rents at such properties;



•

the disposal of non-core assets within an expected time frame; and



•

Our ability to raise long-term financing to implement a capital structure at a cost of capital consistent with our business strategy.

Our business strategy also includes the selective development and construction of retail properties. Any development, redevelopment and construction activities that we may undertake will be subject to the risks of real estate development, including lack of financing, construction delays, environmental requirements, budget overruns, sunk costs and lease-up. Furthermore, occupancy rates and rents at a newly completed property may not be sufficient to make the property profitable. Real estate development activities are also subject to risks relating to the inability to obtain, or delays in obtaining, all necessary zoning, land-use, building, and occupancy and other required governmental permits and authorizations. If any of the above events occur, our ability to pay dividends to our stockholders and service our indebtedness could be adversely affected.

U.S. federal income tax developments could affect the desirability of investing in us for individual taxpayers.

In May 2003, U.S. federal legislation was enacted that reduced the maximum tax rate for dividends payable to individual taxpayers generally from 38.6% to 15% (from January 1, 2003 through 2008). However, dividends payable by REITs are not eligible for such treatment, except in limited circumstances which we do not expect to occur. Although this legislation did not have a directly adverse effect on the taxation of REITs or dividends paid by REITs, the more favorable treatment for non-REIT dividends could cause individual investors to consider investments in non-REIT corporations as more attractive relative to an investment in a REIT.

Certain individuals have substantial influence over the management of both us and the Operating Partnership, which may create conflicts of interest.

Under the limited partnership agreement of the Operating Partnership, we, as the sole general partner, are responsible for the management of the Operating Partnership's business and affairs. Each of the principals serve as our executive officers and are members of our board of directors. Accordingly, these principals have substantial influence over our management and the management of the Operating Partnership.

The tax consequences of the sale of some of the Centers may create conflicts of interest.

The Macerich Company    17

The principals will experience negative tax consequences if some of the Centers are sold. As a result, the principals may not favor a sale of these Centers even though such a sale may benefit our other stockholders.

The guarantees of indebtedness by and certain holdings of the principals may create conflicts of interest.

The principals have guaranteed mortgage loans encumbering one of the Centers. As of December 31, 2005, the principals have guaranteed an aggregate principal amount of approximately $21.8 million. The existence of guarantees of these loans by the principals could result in the principals having interests that are inconsistent with the interests of our stockholders.

The principals may have different interests than our stockholders because they are significant holders of the Operating Partnership.

If we were to fail to qualify as a REIT, we will have reduced funds available for distributions to our stockholders.

We believe that we currently qualify as a REIT. No assurance can be given that we will remain qualified as a REIT. Qualification as a REIT involves the application of highly technical and complex Internal Revenue Code provisions for which there are only limited judicial or administrative interpretations. The complexity of these provisions and of the applicable income tax regulations is greater in the case of a REIT structure like ours that holds assets in partnership form. The determination of various factual matters and circumstances not entirely within our control, including determinations by our partners in the Joint Venture Centers, may affect our continued qualification as a REIT. In addition, legislation, new regulations, administrative interpretations or court decisions could significantly change the tax laws with respect to our qualification as a REIT or the U.S. federal income tax consequences of that qualification.

If in any taxable year we were to fail to qualify as a REIT, we will suffer the following negative results:

•

we will not be allowed a deduction for distributions to stockholders in computing our taxable income; and



•

we will be subject to U.S. federal income tax on our taxable income at regular corporate rates.

In addition, if we were to lose our REIT status, we will be prohibited from qualifying as a REIT for the four taxable years following the year during which the qualification was lost, absent relief under statutory provisions. As a result, net income and the funds available for distributions to our stockholders would be reduced for at least five years and the fair market value of our shares could be materially adversely affected. Furthermore, the Internal Revenue Service could challenge our REIT status for past periods, which if successful could result in us owing a material amount of tax for prior periods. It is possible that future economic, market, legal, tax or other considerations might cause our board of directors to revoke our REIT election.

18     The Macerich Company

Even if we remain qualified as a REIT, we might face other tax liabilities that reduce our cash flow. Further, we might be subject to federal, state and local taxes on our income and property. Any of these taxes would decrease cash available for distributions to stockholders.

Complying with REIT requirements might cause us to forego otherwise attractive opportunities.

In order to qualify as a REIT for U.S. federal income tax purposes, we must satisfy tests concerning, among other things, our sources of income, the nature of our assets, the amounts we distribute to our stockholders and the ownership of our stock. We may also be required to make distributions to our stockholders at disadvantageous times or when we do not have funds readily available for distribution. Thus, compliance with REIT requirements may cause us to forego opportunities we would otherwise pursue.

In addition, the REIT provisions of the Internal Revenue Code impose a 100% tax on income from "prohibited transactions." Prohibited transactions generally include sales of assets that constitute inventory or other property held for sale in the ordinary course of business, other than foreclosure property. This 100% tax could impact our desire to sell assets and other investments at otherwise opportune times if we believe such sales could be considered a prohibited transaction.

Complying with REIT requirements may force us to borrow to make distributions to our stockholders.

As a REIT, we generally must distribute 90% of our annual taxable income (subject to certain adjustments) to our stockholders. From time to time, we might generate taxable income greater than our net income for financial reporting purposes, or our taxable income might be greater than our cash flow available for distributions to our stockholders. If we do not have other funds available in these situations, we might be unable to distribute 90% of our taxable income as required by the REIT rules. In that case, we would need to borrow funds, sell a portion of our investments (potentially at disadvantageous prices) or find another alternative source of funds. These alternatives could increase our costs or reduce our equity and reduce amounts for investments.

Outside partners in Joint Venture Centers result in additional risks to our stockholders.

We own partial interests in property partnerships that own 44 Joint Venture Centers as well as fee title to a site that is ground leased to a property partnership that owns a Joint Venture Center and several development sites. We may acquire partial interests in additional properties through joint venture arrangements. Investments in Centers that are not Wholly Owned Centers involve risks different from those of investments in Wholly Owned Centers.

We may have fiduciary responsibilities to our partners that could affect decisions concerning the Joint Venture Centers. Third parties may share control of major decisions relating to the Joint Venture Centers, including decisions with respect to sales, refinancings and the timing and amount of additional capital contributions, as

The Macerich Company    19

well as decisions that could have an adverse impact on our status. For example, we may lose our management rights relating to the Joint Venture Centers if:

•

we fail to contribute our share of additional capital needed by the property partnerships;



•

we default under a partnership agreement for a property partnership or other agreements relating to the property partnerships or the Joint Venture Centers; or



•

with respect to certain of the Joint Venture Centers, if certain designated key employees no longer are employed in the designated positions.

In addition, some of our outside partners control the day-to-day operations of eight Joint Venture Centers (NorthPark Center, West Acres Center, Eastland Mall, Granite Run Mall, Lake Square Mall, NorthPark Mall, South Park Mall and Valley Mall). We, therefore, do not control cash distributions from these Centers, and the lack of cash distributions from these Centers could jeopardize our ability to maintain our qualification as a REIT.

Our holding company structure makes it dependent on distributions from the Operating Partnership.

Because we conduct our operations through the Operating Partnership, our ability to service our debt obligations and pay dividends to our stockholders is strictly dependent upon the earnings and cash flows of the Operating Partnership and the ability of the Operating Partnership to make distributions to us. Under the Delaware Revised Uniform Limited Partnership Act, the Operating Partnership is prohibited from making any distribution to us to the extent that at the time of the distribution, after giving effect to the distribution, all liabilities of the Operating Partnership (other than some non-recourse liabilities and some liabilities to the partners) exceed the fair value of the assets of the Operating Partnership.

Possible environmental liabilities could adversely affect us.

Under various federal, state and local environmental laws, ordinances and regulations, a current or previous owner or operator of real property may be liable for the costs of removal or remediation of hazardous or toxic substances on, under or in that real property. These laws often impose liability whether or not the owner or operator knew of, or was responsible for, the presence of hazardous or toxic substances. The costs of investigation, removal or remediation of hazardous or toxic substances may be substantial. In addition, the presence of hazardous or toxic substances, or the failure to remedy environmental hazards properly, may adversely affect the owner's or operator's ability to sell or rent affected real property or to borrow money using affected real property as collateral.

Persons or entities that arrange for the disposal or treatment of hazardous or toxic substances may also be liable for the costs of removal or remediation of hazardous or toxic substances at the disposal or treatment facility, whether or not that facility is owned or operated by the person or entity arranging for the disposal or treatment of hazardous or toxic substances. Laws exist that impose liability for release of ACMs into the air, and third parties may seek recovery from owners or operators of real property for personal injury associated with exposure to ACMs. In connection with our ownership, operation, management, development and

20     The Macerich Company

redevelopment of the Centers, or any other centers or properties we acquire in the future, we may be potentially liable under these laws and may incur costs in responding to these liabilities.

Uninsured losses could adversely affect our financial condition.

Each of our Centers has comprehensive liability, fire, extended coverage and rental loss insurance with insured limits customarily carried for similar properties. We do not insure certain types of losses (such as losses from wars), because they are either uninsurable or not economically insurable. In addition, while we or the relevant joint venture, as applicable, carry earthquake insurance on the Centers located in California, the policies are subject to a deductible equal to 5% of the total insured value of each Center, a $100,000 per occurrence minimum and a combined annual aggregate loss limit of $200 million on these Centers. While we or the relevant joint venture also carries terrorism insurance on the Centers, the policies are subject to a $10,000 deductible and a combined annual aggregate loss limit of $800 million for both certified and non-certified acts of terrorism. Each Center has environmental insurance covering eligible third-party losses, remediation and non-owned disposal sites, subject to a $100,000 deductible and a $10 million three-year aggregate limit. Some environmental losses are not covered by this insurance because they are uninsurable or not economically insurable. Furthermore, we carry title insurance on many of the Centers for less than their full value. If an uninsured loss or a loss in excess of insured limits occurs, the entity that owns the affected Center could lose its capital invested in the Center, as well as the anticipated future revenue from the Center, while remaining obligated for any mortgage indebtedness or other financial obligations related to the Center. An uninsured loss or loss in excess of insured limits may negatively impact our financial condition.

As the general partner of the Operating Partnership and certain of the property partnerships, we are generally liable for any of its unsatisfied obligations other than non-recourse obligations.

An ownership limit and certain anti-takeover defenses could inhibit a change of control of us or reduce the value of our common stock.

The Ownership Limit.    In order for us to maintain our qualification as a REIT, not more than 50% in value of our outstanding stock (after taking into account options to acquire stock) may be owned, directly or indirectly, by five or fewer individuals (as defined in the Internal Revenue Code to include some entities that would not ordinarily be considered "individuals") during the last half of a taxable year. Our Charter restricts ownership of more than 5% (the "Ownership Limit") of the lesser of the number or value of our outstanding shares of stock by any single stockholder (with limited exceptions for some holders of limited partnership interests in the Operating Partnership, and their respective families and affiliated entities, including all four principals). In addition to enhancing preservation of our status as a REIT, the Ownership Limit may:

•

have the effect of delaying, deferring or preventing a change in control of us or other transaction without the approval of our board of directors, even if the change in control or other transaction is in the best interest of our stockholders; and



•

limit the opportunity for our stockholders to receive a premium for their common stock that they might otherwise receive if an investor were attempting to acquire a block of common stock in excess of the Ownership Limit or otherwise effect a change in control of us.

The Macerich Company    21

Our board of directors, in its sole discretion, may waive or modify (subject to limitations) the Ownership Limit with respect to one or more of our stockholders, if it is satisfied that ownership in excess of this limit will not jeopardize our status as a REIT.

Stockholder Rights Plan and Selected Provisions of our Charter and Bylaws.    Agreements to which we are a party, as well as some of the provisions of our Charter and bylaws, may have the effect of delaying, deferring or preventing a third party from making an acquisition proposal for us and may inhibit a change in control that some, or a majority, of our stockholders might believe to be in their best interest or that could give our stockholders the opportunity to realize a premium over the then-prevailing market prices for our shares. These agreements and provisions include the following:

•

a stockholder rights plan (which is generally triggered when an entity, group or person acquires 15% or more of our common stock), which, in the event of a takeover attempt not approved by our board of directors, allows our stockholders to purchase shares of our common stock, or the common stock of the acquiring entity, at a 50% discount;



•

a staggered board of directors and limitations on the removal of directors, which may make the replacement of incumbent directors more time-consuming and difficult;



•

advance notice requirements for stockholder nominations of directors and stockholder proposals to be considered at stockholder meetings;



•

the obligation of the directors to consider a variety of factors (in addition to maximizing stockholder value) with respect to a proposed business combination or other change of control transaction;



•

the authority of the directors to classify or reclassify unissued shares and issue one or more series of common stock or preferred stock;



•

the authority to create and issue rights entitling the holders thereof to purchase shares of stock or other securities or property from us; and



•

limitations on the amendment of our Charter and bylaws, the dissolution or change in control of us, and the liability of our directors and officers.

Selected Provisions of Maryland Law.    The Maryland General Corporation Law prohibits business combinations between a Maryland corporation and an interested stockholder (which includes any person who beneficially holds 10% or more of the voting power of the corporation's shares) or its affiliates for five years following the most recent date on which the interested stockholder became an interested stockholder and, after the five-year period, requires the recommendation of the board of directors and two super-majority stockholder votes to approve a business combination unless the stockholders receive a minimum price determined by the statute. As permitted by Maryland law, our Charter exempts from these provisions any business combination between us and the principals and their respective affiliates and related persons. Maryland law also allows the board of directors to exempt particular business combinations before the interested stockholder becomes an interested stockholder. Furthermore, a person is not an interested

22     The Macerich Company

stockholder if the transaction by which he or she would otherwise have become an interested stockholder is approved in advance by the board of directors.

The Maryland General Corporation Law also provides that the acquirer of certain levels of voting power in electing directors of a Maryland corporation (one-tenth or more but less than one-third, one-third or more but less than a majority and a majority or more) is not entitled to vote the shares in excess of the applicable threshold, unless voting rights for the shares are approved by holders of two thirds of the disinterested shares or unless the acquisition of the shares has been specifically or generally approved or exempted from the statute by a provision in our Charter or bylaws adopted before the acquisition of the shares. Our Charter exempts from these provisions voting rights of shares owned or acquired by the principals and their respective affiliates and related persons. Our bylaws also contain a provision exempting from this statute any acquisition by any person of shares of our common stock. There can be no assurance that this bylaw will not be amended or eliminated in the future. The Maryland General Corporation Law and our Charter also contain supermajority voting requirements with respect to our ability to amend our Charter, dissolve, merge, or sell all or substantially all of our assets.

Item 1B. Unresolved Staff Comments

Not Applicable

The Macerich Company    23

Item 2. Properties

24     The Macerich Company

The Macerich Company    25

26     The Macerich Company

The Macerich Company    27

28     The Macerich Company

(1)

With respect to 77 Centers, the underlying land controlled by the Company is owned in fee entirely by the Company, or, in the case of jointly-owned Centers, by the joint venture property partnership or limited liability company. With respect to the remaining Centers, the underlying land controlled by the Company is owned by third parties and leased to the Company, the property partnership or the limited liability company pursuant to long-term ground leases. Under the terms of a typical ground lease, the Company, the property partnership or the limited liability company pays rent for the use of the land and is generally responsible for all costs and expenses associated with the building and improvements. In some cases, the Company, the property partnership or the limited liability company has an option or right of first refusal to purchase the land. The termination dates of the ground leases range from 2013 to 2132.

(2)

Includes GLA attributable to Anchors (whether owned or non-owned) and Mall and Freestanding Stores as of December 31, 2005.

(3)

Sales are based on reports by retailers leasing Mall and Freestanding Stores for the twelve months ended December 31, 2005 for tenants which have occupied such stores for a minimum of 12 months. Sales per square foot are based on tenants 10,000 square feet and under, excluding theaters.

(4)

Portions of the land on which the Center is situated are subject to one or more ground leases.

(5)

Federated Department Stores, Inc. disclosed that it has identified duplicate locations in certain malls which will be divested during 2006. Eleven of the identified stores are located in 10 of the Centers.

(6)

The Bon-Ton Stores, Inc. has acquired Herberger's and Younkers from Saks Incorporated in a transaction completed in June 2006. Herberger's completed a 42,000 square foot expansion at Rimrock Mall in October 2005. The Bon-Ton stores at Great Northern Mall and Shoppingtown Mall closed in January 2006.

(7)

Dillard's completed a 58,000 square foot expansion at Green Tree Mall in March 2005.

(8)

At Washington Square, an agreement has been reached with Mervyn's to recapture its 100,000 square foot location. The Company plans to recycle that square footage over the next two years.

(9)

Nordstrom opened a new 200,000 square foot store at NorthPark Center in November 2005.

(10)

The office portion of this mixed-use development does not have retail sales.

(11)

Target opened a new 116,000 square foot store at Valley Mall in October 2005.

(12)

Wal-Mart opened a 206,527 square foot store at San Tan Village in January 2005.

(13)

Home Depot opened a new 141,000 square foot store at Twenty Ninth Street in January 2006.

(14)

Tenant spaces have been intentionally held off the market and remain vacant or are under construction because of major development or redevelopment plans. As a result, the Company believes the percentage of mall and freestanding GLA leased and the sales per square foot at these major redevelopment properties is not meaningful data.

The Macerich Company    29

Mortgage Debt

The following table sets forth certain information regarding the mortgages encumbering the Centers, including those Centers in which the Company has less than a 100% interest. The information set forth below is as of December 31, 2005, (dollars in thousands):

30     The Macerich Company

(1)

The mortgage notes payable balances include the unamortized debt premiums (discounts). Debt premiums (discounts) represent the excess of the fair value of debt over the principal value of debt assumed in various acquisitions. The debt premiums (discounts) are being amortized into interest expense over the term of the related debt, in a manner which approximates the effective interest method. The annual interst rate in the above tables represent the effective interest rate, including the debt premiums (discounts).

The Macerich Company    31

  The debt premiums (discounts) as of December 31, 2005 consist of the following:

  Consolidated Centers

  Joint Venture Centers (at Company's Pro Rata Share)

(2)

This annual debt service represents the payment of principal and interest. In addition, contingent interest, as defined in the loan agreement, may be due to the extent that 35% of the amount by which the property's gross receipts (as defined in the loan agreement) exceeds a base amount specified therein. Contingent interest expense recognized by the Company was $0.7 million for the year ended December 31, 2005.

(3)

The floating rate loan bears interest at LIBOR plus 0.65%. The Company has stepped interest rate cap agreements over the term of the loan that effectively prevent LIBOR from exceeding 7.95%.

(4)

Concurrent with the acquisition of this property, the Company placed a $30.0 million floating rate loan bearing interest at LIBOR plus 0.88%. The loan matures August 9, 2007 with two one-year extensions through August 9, 2009. At December 31, 2005, the total interest rate was 5.25%. This floating rate debt is covered by an interest rate cap agreement over the loan term which effectively prevents LIBOR from exceeding 7.12%.

(5)

This represents a construction loan which shall not exceed $51.0 million bearing interest at LIBOR plus 2.0%. At December 31, 2005, the total interest rate was 6.39%. On January 6, 2006, the Company modified the loan to reduce the interest rate to LIBOR plus 1.75% with the opportunity for further reduction upon satisfaction of certain conditions to LIBOR plus 1.50%. The maturity date was extended to August 1, 2008, with two extension options of eighteen and twelve months, respectively.

(6)

On June 30, 2004, the Company placed an $85.0 million loan maturing in 2009. The loan floated at LIBOR plus 2.0% for six months and then converted to a fixed rate loan at 4.94%. The effective interest rate over the loan term is 4.84%.

(7)

Concurrent with the acquisition of the mall, the Company placed a $108.0 million loan bearing interest at LIBOR plus 1.15% and maturing July 1, 2004 with three consecutive one year options. $92.0 million of the loan is at LIBOR plus 0.7% and $16.0 million is at LIBOR plus 3.75%. In July 2005, the Company extended the loan maturity to July 2006. At December 31, 2005, the weighted average interest rate was 5.34%.

32     The Macerich Company

(8)

This loan bore interest at LIBOR plus 1.65%. On February 15, 2006, the existing loan was paid-off in full and replaced with a $50.0 million floating rate loan that bears interest at LIBOR plus 0.85% and matures in February 2010. There is an interest rate cap agreement on the new loan that effectively prevents LIBOR from exceeding 6.65%.

(9)

On July 31, 2004, this construction loan matured and was replaced with a three-year loan, plus two one-year extension options at LIBOR plus 1.65%. At December 31, 2005, the total interest rate was 6.03%.

(10)

Both of these loans were paid off in full on January 3, 2006.

(11)

This represented a $225.0 million construction loan which bore interest at LIBOR plus 2.50%. The loan converted to a fixed rate loan at 7.00% on August 19, 2005, due to the completion and stabilization of the expansion and redevelopment project. NML is the lender for 50% of the construction loan. The funds advanced by NML are considered related party debt as they are a joint venture partner with the Company in Macerich Northwestern Associates.

(12)

The floating rate loan bears interest at LIBOR plus 1.75%. The total interest rate at December 31, 2005 was 6.0%.

(13)

This floating rate loan was issued on February 18, 2004. The loan bears interest at LIBOR plus 1.375% and matures February 20, 2006 with a one-year extension option. At December 31, 2005, the total interest rate was 4.75%. The Company has extended the maturity date to March 31, 2006. The Company is in the process of refinancing this loan.

(14)

The property has a construction note payable which shall not exceed $54.0 million, which bore interest at LIBOR plus 2.00%. At December 31, 2005, the total interest rate was 5.62%. On September 22, 2005, this loan was modified to increase the loan to $56.0 million, and to reduce the interest rate to LIBOR plus 1.25%. The loan matures on September 16, 2008 and has two one-year extension options.

(15)

The property has a construction note payable which shall not exceed $11.4 million bearing interest at LIBOR plus 2.0%. At December 31, 2005, the total interest rate was 5.64%. On December 16, 2005, the joint venture refinanced the existing loan with a $21.4 million loan bearing interest at LIBOR plus 1.25%. The loan matures on December 16, 2007 and has one twelve-month extension option.

(16)

On October 4, 2005, the joint venture refinanced the existing loan on the property with a $41.5 million loan bearing interest at LIBOR plus 0.69%. The loan matures on October 9, 2007, and has three one-year extension options. This floating rate debt is covered by an interest rate cap agreement over the loan term which effectively prevents LIBOR from exceeding 8.54%.

(17)

On March 1, 2006, the joint venture refinanced the existing loan on the property with a $51.5 million floating rate loan bearing interest at LIBOR plus 1.10%. The loan matures in February 2008 and has three one year extension options.

(18)

This note was assumed at acquisition. The loan consists of 3 traunches, with a range of maturities from 36 months (with two 18-month extension options) to 60 months. The floating rate debt ranges from LIBOR plus 0.60% to LIBOR plus 2.50%, and fixed rate debt ranges from 5.01% to 6.18%. This loan is part of a larger loan group, and is cross-collateralized and cross-defaulted with the other properties in that group, which are unaffiliated with the Company. An interest rate swap was entered into to convert $0.4 million of floating rate debt with a weighted average interest rate of 3.97% to a fixed rate of 5.39%. The interest rate swap has been designated as a hedge in accordance with Statement on Financial Accounting Standards ("SFAS") No.133, "Accounting for Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities." Additionally, interest rate caps were entered into on a portion of the debt and reverse interest rate caps were simultaneously sold to offset the effect of the interest rate cap agreements. These interest rate caps do not qualify for hedge accounting in accordance with SFAS No. 133.

(19)

On January 11, 2005, concurrent with the acquisition of the property, the joint venture entered into a mortgage loan of $112.0 million, which bears interest at LIBOR plus 0.94%. The loan matures on February 9, 2008 and has two one-year extension options. The joint venture entered into an interest rate swap agreement for $112.0 million to convert this loan from floating to fixed at a rate of 3.86%, which effectively limits the interest rate on this loan to 4.80%. The interest rate swap has been designated as a hedge in accordance with SFAS No. 133.

(20)

On January 11, 2005, concurrent with the acquisition of the property, the joint venture entered into a loan for $37.38 million, which bears interest at LIBOR plus 3.45%. The weighted average interest rate at December 31, 2005 was 7.82%.

(21)

The annual debt service represents the payment of principal and interest. In addition, contingent interest, as defined in the loan agreement, is due upon the occurrence of certain capital events and is equal to 15% of proceeds less the base amount.

(22)

In connection with the acquisition of these Centers, the joint venture assumed $485.0 million of mortgage notes payable which are collateralized by the properties. At acquisition, the $300.0 million fixed rate portion of this debt reflected a fair value of $322.7 million, which included an unamortized premium of $22.7 million. This premium is being amortized as interest expense over the life of the loan using the effective interest method. At December 31, 2005, the unamortized balance of the debt premium was $1.3 million.

On April 12, 2000, the joint venture issued $138.5 million of additional mortgage notes, which are collateralized by the properties and are due in May 2006. $57.1 million of this debt requires fixed monthly interest payments of $0.4 million at a weighted average rate of 8.13% while the floating rate notes of $81.4 million require monthly interest payments at a floating weighted average rate (based on LIBOR) of 4.74% at December 31, 2005. This floating rate debt is covered by an interest rate cap agreement which effectively prevents LIBOR from exceeding 11.83%.

The Macerich Company    33

$184.5 million of this debt was refinanced in May 2003 with a new loan of $186.5 million that requires monthly interest payments at a floating weighted average rate (based on LIBOR) of 4.79% at December 31, 2005. This floating rate debt is covered by interest rate cap agreements, which effectively prevent LIBOR from exceeding 10.63%.

Management of the joint venture anticipates it will successfully refinance the existing debt, all of which matures in May 2006, with debt having similar terms to the current debt.

(23)

The property has a construction note payable which shall not exceed $28.0 million bearing interest at LIBOR plus 2.0%. At December 31, 2005, the total interest rate was 6.57%.

(24)

This note was assumed at acquisition. The loan consists of 3 tranches, with a range of maturities from 36 months (with two 18-month extension options) to 60 months. The floating rate debt ranges from LIBOR plus 0.60% to LIBOR plus 2.5%, and fixed rate debt ranges from 5.01% to 6.18%. This loan is part of a larger loan group, and is cross-collateralized and cross-defaulted with the other properties in that group, which are unaffiliated with the Company. An interest rate swap was entered into that converts $3.0 million of floating rate debt with a weighted average interest rate of 3.97% to a fixed rate of 5.39%. The interest rate swap has been designated as a hedge in accordance with SFAS No. 133. Additionally, interest rate caps were entered into on a portion of the debt and reverse interest rate caps were simultaneously sold to offset the effect of the interest rate cap agreements. These interest rate caps do not qualify for hedge accounting in accordance with SFAS No. 133.

(25)

On October 7, 2004, the joint venture placed an additional mortgage loan on the property totaling $35.0 million bearing interest at LIBOR plus 2.00%.

Item 3. Legal Proceedings

None of the Company, the Operating Partnership, Macerich Property Management Company, LLC, Macerich Management Company, the Westcor Management Companies, Wilmorite Management Companies or their respective affiliates are currently involved in any material litigation nor, to the Company's knowledge, is any material litigation currently threatened against such entities or the Centers, other than routine litigation arising in the ordinary course of business, most of which is expected to be covered by liability insurance. For information about certain environmental matters, see "Business—Environmental Matters."

Item 4. Submission of Matters to a Vote of Securities Holders

None

34     The Macerich Company

Part II

Item 5. Market for Registrant's Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities

The common stock of the Company is listed and traded on the New York Stock Exchange under the symbol "MAC". The common stock began trading on March 10, 1994 at a price of $19 per share. In 2005, the Company's shares traded at a high of $71.22 and a low of $53.10.

As of February 24, 2006, there were approximately 961 stockholders of record. The following table shows high and low closing prices per share of common stock during each quarter in 2004 and 2005 and dividends/distributions per share of common stock declared and paid by quarter:

The Company issued 3,627,131 shares of its Series A cumulative convertible redeemable preferred stock ("Series A Preferred Stock"). There is no established public trading market for the Series A Preferred Stock. The Series A Preferred Stock was issued on February 25, 1998. Preferred stock dividends are accrued quarterly and paid in arrears. The Series A Preferred Stock can be converted on a one for one basis into common stock and will pay a quarterly dividend equal to the greater of $0.46 per share, or the dividend then payable on a share of common stock. No dividends will be declared or paid on any class of common or other junior stock to the extent that dividends on Series A Preferred Stock have not been declared and/or paid. The

The Macerich Company    35

following table shows the dividends per share of preferred stock declared and paid for each quarter in 2004 and 2005:

The Company's existing financing agreements limit, and any other financing agreements that the Company enters into in the future will likely limit, the Company's ability to pay cash dividends. Specifically, the Company may pay cash dividends and make other distributions based on a formula derived from Funds from Operations (See Item 7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations—Funds From Operations) and only if no event of default under the financing agreements has occurred, unless, under certain circumstances, payment of the distribution is necessary to enable the Company to qualify as a REIT under the Internal Revenue Code.

36     The Macerich Company

Item 6. Selected Financial Data

The following sets forth selected financial data for the Company on a historical basis. The following data should be read in conjunction with the financial statements (and the notes thereto) of the Company and "Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations" each included elsewhere in this Form 10-K. All amounts in thousands except per share data.

The Macerich Company    37