The Company’s substantial debt may adversely affect its business, financial condition and financial results.

The Company has borrowed substantially in the past and will continue to borrow in the future. At December 31, 2016, Lamar Advertising Company’s wholly owned subsidiary, Lamar Media, had approximately $2.35 billion of total debt outstanding, net of deferred financing costs, consisting of approximately $428.4 million in bank debt outstanding under Lamar Media’s senior credit facility, $1.0 billion in various series of senior subordinated notes and $898.6 million in senior notes. Despite the level of debt presently outstanding, the terms of the indentures governing Lamar Media’s notes and the terms of the senior credit facility allow Lamar Media to incur substantially more debt, including approximately $209.9 million available for borrowing as of December 31, 2016 under the revolving senior credit facility.

The Company’s substantial debt and its use of cash flow from operations to make principal and interest payments on its debt may, among other things:

Any of these problems could adversely affect the Company’s business, financial condition and financial results.

Restrictions in the Company’s and Lamar Media’s debt agreements reduce operating flexibility and contain covenants and restrictions that create the potential for defaults, which could adversely affect the Company’s business, financial condition and financial results.

The terms of Lamar Media’s senior credit facility and the indentures relating to Lamar Media’s outstanding notes restrict the ability of the Company and Lamar Media to, among other things:

14

At December 31, 2016, the terms of Lamar Media’s senior credit facility also restrict the Company from exceeding a specified senior debt ratio. Lamar Media is also subject to certain other financial covenants relating to the incurrence of additional debt. Please see “ Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Liquidity and Capital Resources ” for a description of the specific financial ratio requirements under the senior credit facility.

The Company’s ability to comply with the financial covenants in the senior credit facility and the indentures governing Lamar Media’s outstanding notes (and to comply with similar covenants in any future agreements) depends on its operating performance, which in turn depends significantly on prevailing economic, financial and business conditions and other factors that are beyond the Company’s control. Therefore, despite its best efforts and execution of its strategic plan, the Company may be unable to comply with these financial covenants in the future.

The Company is currently in compliance with all financial covenants. However, if in the future there are economic declines the Company can make no assurance that these declines will not negatively impact the Company’s financial results and, in turn, its ability to meet these financial covenant requirements. If Lamar Media fails to comply with its financial covenants, the lenders under the senior credit facility could accelerate all of the debt outstanding, which would create serious financial problems and could lead to a default under the indentures governing Lamar Media’s outstanding notes. Any of these events could adversely affect the Company’s business, financial condition and financial results.

In addition, these restrictions reduce the Company’s operating flexibility and could prevent the Company from exploiting investment, acquisition, marketing, or other time-sensitive business opportunities.

The Company’s revenues are sensitive to general economic conditions and other external events beyond the Company’s control.

The Company rents advertising space on outdoor structures to generate revenues. Advertising spending is particularly sensitive to changes in economic conditions.

Additionally, the occurrence of any of the following external events could further depress the Company’s revenues:

The Company’s growth through acquisitions may be difficult, which could adversely affect our future financial performance. In addition, if we are unable to successfully integrate any completed acquisitions, our financial performance would also be adversely affected.

The Company has historically grown through acquisitions. During the year ended December 31, 2016, we completed acquisitions for a total cash purchase price of approximately $585.1 million, which includes assets purchased in five markets from Clear Channel Outdoor Holdings, Inc. for an aggregate cash purchase price of approximately $458.5 million. We intend to continue to evaluate strategic acquisition opportunities as they arise.

The future success of our acquisition strategy could be adversely affected by many factors, including the following:

15

These obstacles to our opportunistic acquisition strategy may have an adverse effect on our future financial results.

The Company could suffer losses due to asset impairment charges for goodwill and other intangible assets.

The Company tested goodwill for impairment on December 31, 2016. Based on the Company’s review at December 31, 2016, no impairment charge was required. The Company continues to assess whether factors or indicators become apparent that would require an interim impairment test between our annual impairment test dates. For instance, if our market capitalization is below our equity book value for a period of time without recovery, we believe there is a strong presumption that would indicate a triggering event has occurred and it is more likely than not that the fair value of one or both of our reporting units are below their carrying amount. This would require us to test the reporting units for impairment of goodwill. If this presumption cannot be overcome a reporting unit could be impaired under ASC 350 “Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets” and a non-cash charge would be required. Any such charge could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s net earnings.

The Company faces competition from larger and more diversified outdoor advertisers and other forms of advertising that could hurt its performance.

While the Company enjoys a significant market share in many of its small and medium-sized markets, the Company faces competition from other outdoor advertisers and other media in all of its markets. Although the Company is one of the largest companies focusing exclusively on outdoor advertising in a relatively fragmented industry, it competes against larger companies with diversified operations, such as television, radio and other broadcast media. These diversified competitors have the advantage of cross-selling complementary advertising products to advertisers.

The Company also competes against an increasing variety of out-of-home advertising media, such as advertising displays in shopping centers, malls, airports, stadiums, movie theaters and supermarkets, and on taxis, trains and buses. To a lesser extent, the Company also faces competition from other forms of media, including radio, newspapers, direct mail advertising, telephone directories and the Internet. The industry competes for advertising revenue along the following dimensions: exposure (the number of “impressions” an advertisement makes), advertising rates (generally measured in cost-per-thousand impressions), ability to target specific demographic groups or geographies, effectiveness, quality of related services (such as advertising copy design and layout) and customer service. The Company may be unable to compete successfully along these dimensions in the future, and the competitive pressures that the Company faces could adversely affect its profitability or financial performance.

Federal, state and local regulation impact the Company’s operations, financial condition and financial results.

Outdoor advertising is subject to governmental regulation at the federal, state and local levels. Regulations generally restrict the size, spacing, lighting and other aspects of advertising structures and pose a significant barrier to entry and expansion in many markets.

Federal law, principally the Highway Beautification Act of 1965, or the HBA, regulates outdoor advertising on Federal — Aid Primary, Interstate and National Highway Systems roads. The HBA requires states, through the adoption of individual Federal/State Agreements, to “effectively control” outdoor advertising along these roads, and mandates a state compliance program and state standards regarding size, spacing and lighting. The HBA requires any state or political subdivision that compels the removal of a lawful billboard along a Federal — Aid Primary or Interstate highway to pay just compensation to the billboard owner.

All states have passed billboard control statutes and regulations at least as restrictive as the federal requirements, including laws requiring the removal of illegal signs at the owner’s expense (and without compensation from the state). Although the Company believes that the number of our billboards that may be subject to removal as illegal is immaterial, and no state in which we operate has banned billboards entirely, from time to time governments have required us to remove signs and billboards legally erected in accordance with federal, state and local permit requirements and laws. Municipal and county governments generally also have sign controls as part of their zoning laws and building codes. We contest laws and regulations that we believe unlawfully restrict our constitutional or other legal rights and may adversely impact the growth of our outdoor advertising business.

Using federal funding for transportation enhancement programs, state governments have purchased and removed billboards for beautification, and may do so again in the future. Under the power of eminent domain, state or municipal governments have laid claim to property and forced the removal of billboards. Under a concept called amortization by which a governmental body asserts that a billboard operator has earned compensation by continued operation over time, local governments have attempted to force removal of

16

legal but nonconforming billboards (i.e., billboards that conformed to applicable zoning regulations when built but which do not conform to current zoning regulations). Although the legality of amortization is questionable, it has been upheld in some i nstances. Often, municipal and county governments also have sign controls as part of their zoning laws, with some local governments prohibiting construction of new billboards or allowing new construction only to replace existing structures. Although we hav e generally been able to obtain satisfactory compensation for those of our billboards purchased or removed as a result of governmental action, there is no assurance that this will continue to be the case in the future.

We have also introduced and intend to expand the deployment of digital billboards that display static digital advertising copy from various advertisers that change every 6 to 8 seconds. We have encountered some existing regulations that restrict or prohibit these types of digital displays but it has not yet materially impacted our digital deployment. Since digital billboards have only recently been developed and introduced into the market on a large scale, however, existing regulations that currently do not apply to them by their terms could be revised to impose greater restrictions. These regulations may impose greater restrictions on digital billboards due to alleged concerns over aesthetics or driver safety.

In January 2013, Scenic America, Inc., a nonprofit membership organization, filed a lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Transportation (“USDOT”) and the Federal Highway Administration. The complaint alleged that (i) the FHWA exceeded its authority when the agency issued the 2007 Guidance to assist its division offices in evaluating state regulations that authorize the construction and operation of digital billboards that are in conformance with restrictions on “intermittent”, “flashing” or “moving” lights, which restrictions are contained in the individual Federal/State Agreements that implement the provisions of the HBA (the “2007 Guidance”) and that in issuing the 2007 Guidance, the FHWA violated the Administrative Procedures Act by not first engaging in formal rulemaking, (ii) the 2007 Guidance violated the HBA because it adopted “a new lighting standard” without first amending the provisions of the Federal/State Agreements and (iii) the 2007 Guidance violated the HBA because digital billboards are themselves “inconsistent with customary use” of outdoor advertising, as that term is used in the HBA. As the principal remedy for these alleged violations, the complaint sought an injunction vacating the 2007 Guidance. On June 20, 2014, the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia dismissed all challenges made by Scenic America to the 2007 Guidance finding that (i) the 2007 Guidance was an interpretive and not a substantive rule and, therefore, did not violate the APA, (ii) the 2007 Guidance did not infringe on the Federal/State Agreements and (iii) the 2007 Guidance is consistent with “customary use” and, therefore, did not violate the HBA. Scenic America filed a notice of appeal from the District Court’s judgment to the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals on August 7, 2014.  On September 6, 2016, the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia issued a unanimous opinion rejecting Scenic America’s attack on digital billboards, upholding the Federal Highway Administration’s 2007 Guidance that authorizes states to allow digital billboards. Scenic America has filed a writ of certiorari to the U.S. Supreme Court and the writ is still pending.

On December 30, 2013, USDOT and FHWA published a Notice encouraging states to work with the FHWA to review their Federal/State Agreements, most of which were put in place in the late 1960s and early 1970s, to determine if amendments are advisable. FHWA encouraged each state to work with their FHWA division offices to amend its Federal/State Agreement so that it is consistent with the state’s current outdoor advertising objectives and address the evolving technology being used or that could be used in the future by the outdoor industry. The Notice details a multi-step process to achieve this goal. The Notice does not make any reference to the 2007 Guidance, nor does it recommend or require any specific substantive amendments to a state’s Federal/State Agreement. It is uncertain whether the FHWA Notice will have any impact on current federal, state or local regulation of outdoor advertising signs. To the extent that any Federal/State Agreements are amended in a manner that places new restrictions on outdoor advertising it could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations or financial condition.

Relatively few large scale studies have been conducted to date regarding driver safety issues, if any, related to digital billboards. On December 30, 2013, the results of a study conducted by USDOT and FHWA that looked at the effect of digital billboards and conventional billboards on driver visual behavior were issued. The conclusions of the report indicated that the presence of digital billboards did not appear to be related to a decrease in looking toward the road ahead and were generally within acceptable thresholds. The report cautioned, however, that it adds to the knowledge base but does not present definitive answers to the research questions investigated. Accordingly, the results of this or other studies may result in regulations at the federal or state level that impose greater restrictions on digital billboards. Any new restrictions on digital billboards could have a material adverse effect on both our existing inventory of digital billboards and our plans to expand our digital deployment, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

The Company’s logo sign contracts are subject to state award and renewal.

In 2016, the Company generated approximately 5% of its revenues from state-awarded logo sign contracts. In bidding for these contracts, the Company competes against other national and local logo sign providers. A logo sign provider incurs significant start-up costs upon being awarded a new contract. These contracts generally have a term of five to ten years, with additional renewal periods. Some states reserve the right to terminate a contract early, and most contracts require the state to pay compensation to the logo sign provider for early termination. At the end of the contract term, the logo sign provider transfers ownership of the logo sign structures to

17

the sta te. Depending on the contract, the logo provider may or may not be entitled to compensation for the structures at the end of the contract term.

Of the Company’s 24 logo sign contracts in place at December 31, 2016, three are subject to renewal in 2017. The Company may be unable to renew its expiring contracts. The Company may also lose the bidding on new contracts.

The Company is controlled by significant stockholders who have the power to determine the outcome of all matters submitted to the stockholders for approval and whose interest in the Company may be different than yours.

As of December 31, 2016, members of the Reilly family, including Kevin P. Reilly, Jr., the Company’s Chairman and President, and Sean Reilly, the Company’s Chief Executive Officer, and their affiliates, owned in the aggregate approximately 15% of the Company’s outstanding common stock, assuming the conversion of all Class B common stock to Class A common stock. As of that date, their combined holdings represented approximately 64% of the voting power of Lamar Advertising’s outstanding capital stock, which would give the Reilly family and their affiliates the power to:

The Reilly family may have interests that are different than yours in making these decisions.

If the Company’s contingency plans relating to hurricanes and other natural disasters fail, the resulting losses could hurt the Company’s business.

The Company has determined that it is uneconomical to insure against losses resulting from hurricanes and other natural disasters. Although the Company has developed contingency plans designed to mitigate the threat posed by hurricanes and other forms of inclement weather to its real estate portfolio (e.g., removing advertising faces at the onset of a storm, when possible, which better permits the structures to withstand high winds during the storm), these plans could fail and significant losses could result.

If Lamar Advertising fails to remain qualified as a REIT, both Lamar Advertising and Lamar Media would be taxed as regular C corporations and would not be able to deduct distributions to the stockholders of Lamar Advertising when computing their taxable income.

Lamar Advertising elected to qualify as a REIT for U.S. federal income tax purposes starting with its taxable year ended December 31, 2014. REIT qualification involves the application of highly technical and complex provisions of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, (the “Code”) to Lamar Advertising’s assets and operations as well as various factual determinations concerning matters and circumstances not entirely within our control. There are limited judicial or administrative interpretations of these provisions. Although Lamar Advertising plans to operate in a manner consistent with the REIT qualification, the Company cannot assure you that it will so qualify or remain so qualified. Lamar Media is treated as a qualified REIT subsidiary of Lamar Advertising that is disregarded as separate from its parent REIT for U.S. federal income tax purposes.

If, in any taxable year, Lamar Advertising fails to qualify for taxation as a REIT, and is not entitled to relief under the Code:

Any such corporate tax liability could be substantial and would reduce the amount of cash available for required distribution to Lamar Advertising’s stockholders, may require it to borrow funds (under Lamar Media’s senior credit facility or otherwise) or liquidate some investments to pay any such additional tax liability. This adverse impact could last for five or more years because, unless it is entitled to relief under certain statutory provisions, it will be taxable as a corporation, beginning in the year in which the failure occurs, and it will not be allowed to re-elect to be taxed as a REIT for the following four years.

18

Even if it qualifies as a REIT, certain of Lamar Advertising’s business activities will be subject to U.S. and foreign taxes on its income and assets, which will continue to reduce its cash flows, and it will have potential deferred and contingent tax liabilities.

Even if it qualifies as a REIT, Lamar Advertising may be subject to certain U.S. federal, state and local taxes and foreign taxes on its income and assets, including alternative minimum taxes, taxes on any undistributed income, and state, local or foreign income, franchise, property and transfer taxes. In addition, the Company could in certain circumstances be required to pay an excise or penalty tax, which could be significant in amount, in order to utilize one or more relief provisions under the Code to maintain qualification for taxation as a REIT.

In order to maintain its qualification as a REIT, the Company holds certain of its non-qualifying REIT assets and receives certain non-qualifying items of income through one or more TRSs. These non-qualifying REIT assets consist principally of the Company’s advertising services business and its transit advertising business. Those TRS assets and operations will continue to be subject, as applicable, to U.S. federal and state corporate income taxes. Furthermore, the Company’s assets and operations outside the United States are subject to foreign taxes in the jurisdictions in which those assets and operations are located. In addition, the Company may incur a 100% excise tax on transactions with a TRS if they are not conducted on an arm’s-length basis. Any of these taxes would decrease the Company’s earnings and its cash available for distributions to stockholders.

The Company will also be subject to a U.S. federal income tax at the highest regular corporate rate (currently 35%) on all or a portion of the gain recognized from a sale of assets occurring within a specified period (currently, five years) after the effective date of our REIT conversion, to the extent of the built-in gain based on the fair market value of those assets held by the Company on the effective date of REIT conversion in excess of the Company’s then tax basis in those assets. Since the Company elected REIT status for the taxable year ending December 31, 2014, the tax on subsequently sold assets will be based on the fair market value and built-in gains of those assets as of January 1, 2014. The same rules apply to any assets we acquire from a “C” corporation in a carry-over basis transaction with built-in gain at the time of the acquisition by us. Gain from a sale of an asset occurring after the specified period ends will not be subject to this corporate level tax. The Company currently does not expect to sell any asset if the sale would result in the imposition of a material tax liability. It cannot, however, assure you that the Company will not change its plans in this regard.

In addition, the IRS and any state or local tax authority may successfully assert liabilities against the Company for corporate income taxes for taxable years of Lamar Advertising prior to the effective time of the REIT election, in which case the Company will owe these taxes plus applicable interest and penalties, if any. Moreover, any increase in taxable income for these pre-REIT periods will likely result in an increase in non-REIT accumulated earnings and profits which could cause the Company to pay taxable distributions to its stockholders after the relevant determination.

Failure to make sufficient distributions would jeopardize Lamar Advertising’s qualification as a REIT and/or would subject it to U.S. federal income and excise taxes.

As a REIT, Lamar Advertising is required to distribute to its stockholders with respect to each taxable year at least 90% of its taxable income (net of any available net operating loss carry forwards) in order to qualify as a REIT, and 100% of its taxable income (net of any available net operating loss carry forwards) in order to avoid U.S. federal income and excise taxes. For these purposes, Lamar Advertising’s subsidiaries that are not TRSs, including Lamar Media, will be treated as part of the REIT and therefore Lamar Advertising also will be required to distribute out their taxable income.

Because the REIT distribution requirements will prevent us from retaining earnings, we may be required to refinance debt at maturity with additional debt or equity, which may not be available on acceptable terms, or at all.

Covenants specified in our existing and future debt instruments may limit Lamar Advertising’s ability to make required REIT distributions.

Lamar Media’s senior credit facility and the indentures relating to Lamar Media’s outstanding notes contain certain covenants that could limit Lamar Advertising’s distributions to its stockholders. If these limits prevent Lamar Advertising from satisfying its REIT distribution requirements, it could fail to qualify for taxation as a REIT. If these limits do not jeopardize its qualification for taxation as a REIT but do nevertheless prevent it from distributing 100% of its REIT taxable income, it will be subject to federal corporate income tax, and potentially a nondeductible excise tax, on the retained amounts.

Lamar Advertising and its subsidiaries may be required to borrow funds, sell assets, or raise equity to satisfy its REIT distribution requirements or maintain the asset tests.

In order to meet the REIT distribution requirements and maintain its qualification and taxation as a REIT and avoid corporate income taxes, Lamar Advertising and/or its subsidiaries, including Lamar Media, may need to borrow funds, sell assets or raise equity,

19

even if the then-prevailin g market conditions are not favorable for these borrowings, sales or offerings. Any insufficiency of its cash flows to cover Lamar Advertising’s REIT distribution requirements could adversely impact its ability to raise short- and long-term debt, to sell a ssets, or to offer equity securities in order to fund distributions required to maintain its qualification and taxation as a REIT and avoid corporate income taxes. Furthermore, the REIT distribution requirements may increase the financing Lamar Advertising needs to fund capital expenditures, future growth and expansion initiatives. This would increase its total leverage.

In addition, if Lamar Advertising fails to comply with certain asset tests at the end of any calendar quarter, it must correct the failure within 30 days after the end of the calendar quarter or qualify for certain statutory relief provisions to avoid losing its REIT qualification. As a result, it may be required to liquidate otherwise attractive investments. These actions may reduce its income and amounts available for distribution to its stockholders.

Our cash distributions are not guaranteed and may fluctuate

A REIT generally is required to distribute at least 90% of its REIT taxable income to its stockholders. The Company may have available NOLs that could reduce or substantially eliminate its REIT taxable income, and thus it may not be required to distribute material amounts of cash to qualify for taxation as a REIT. The Company expects that, for the foreseeable future, it may utilize available NOLs to reduce its REIT taxable income.

The board of directors of the Company, in its sole discretion, will determine on a quarterly basis the amount of cash to be distributed to its stockholders based on a number of factors including, but not limited to, the Company’s results of operations, cash flow and capital requirements, economic conditions, tax considerations, borrowing capacity and other factors, including debt covenant restrictions that may impose limitations on cash payments, future acquisitions and divestitures, any stock repurchase program, and general market demand for its advertising space available for lease. Consequently, the Company’s distribution levels may fluctuate.

Complying with REIT requirements may cause Lamar Advertising, its subsidiaries (other than TRSs) to forego otherwise attractive opportunities.

To qualify as a REIT for federal income tax purposes, Lamar Advertising must continually satisfy tests concerning, among other things, the sources of its income, the nature and diversification of its assets, the amounts it distributes to its stockholders and the ownership of Lamar Advertising common stock. For these purposes, Lamar Advertising is treated as owning the assets of and receiving or accruing the income of its subsidiaries (other than TRSs). Thus, compliance with these tests will require Lamar Advertising and its subsidiaries to refrain from certain activities and may hinder their ability to make certain attractive investments, including investments in the businesses to be conducted by TRSs, and to that extent limit their opportunities. Furthermore, acquisition opportunities in domestic and international markets may be adversely affected if Lamar Advertising needs or requires the target company to comply with some REIT requirements prior to closing.

Ownership limitations contained in the Lamar Advertising charter may restrict stockholders from acquiring or transferring certain amounts of shares.

In order for Lamar Advertising to remain qualified as a REIT, no more than 50% of the value of the outstanding shares of its stock may be owned, directly or indirectly or through application of certain attribution rules by five or fewer “individuals” (as defined in the Code) at any time during the last half of a taxable year (other than the first taxable year for which an election to be a REIT has been made). To preserve its REIT qualification, the Lamar Advertising charter generally prohibits any person or entity from owning actually and by virtue of the applicable constructive ownership provisions more than 5% of the outstanding shares of Lamar Advertising common stock. These ownership limitations could restrict stockholders from acquiring or transferring certain amounts of shares of its stock. The Lamar Advertising charter also provides a separate share ownership limitation for certain members of the Reilly family and their affiliates that allows them to own actually and by virtue of the applicable constructive ownership provisions no more than 19% of the outstanding shares of Lamar Advertising common stock and, during the second half of any taxable year other than its first taxable year as a REIT, no more than 33% in value of the aggregate of the outstanding shares of all classes and series of its stock, in each case excluding any shares of its stock that are not treated as outstanding for federal income tax purposes.

Complying with REIT requirements may limit the Company’s ability to hedge effectively and increase the cost of its hedging, and may cause us to incur tax liabilities.

The REIT provisions of the Code limit the Company’s ability to hedge liabilities. Generally, income from hedging transactions that the Company enters into to manage risk of interest rate changes with respect to borrowings made or to be made to acquire or carry real estate assets and income from certain currency hedging transactions related to its non-U.S. operations do not constitute “gross income” for purposes of the REIT gross income tests, provided certain requirements are satisfied. To the extent that the Company

20

enters into other types of hedging transactions, the income from those transactions is likely to be treated as non-qualifying income for purposes of the REIT gross income tests. As a result of these rules, the Company may need to limit its use of advantageous hedging techniques or implement those hedges through a TRS. This could increase the cost of the Company’s hedging activities because its TRSs would be subject to tax on income or gains resulting from hedges entered into by them or expose the C ompany to greater risks associated with changes in interest rates than it would otherwise want to bear. In addition, losses in any of the Company’s TRSs generally will not provide any tax benefit, except for being carried forward for use against future tax able income in the applicable TRS.

Lamar Advertising has limited experience operating as a REIT, which may adversely affect its financial condition, results of operations, cash flow, per share trading price of Lamar Class A common stock and ability to satisfy debt service obligations.

Lamar Advertising elected to qualify as a REIT for the taxable year ended December 31, 2014 and, therefore, has limited operating history as a REIT. In addition, its senior management team has limited experience operating a REIT. The Company cannot assure you that its management’s past experience will be sufficient to operate the Company successfully as a REIT. Failure to maintain REIT status could adversely affect Lamar Advertising’s and its subsidiaries’ financial condition, results of operations, cash flow, per share trading price of Lamar Advertising’s Class A common stock and ability to satisfy debt service obligations.

The Lamar Advertising charter, the Lamar Advertising bylaws and Delaware law may inhibit a takeover that stockholders consider favorable and could also limit the market price of Lamar Advertising stock.

Provisions of the Lamar Advertising charter, the Lamar Advertising bylaws and applicable provisions of Delaware law may make it more difficult for or prevent a third party from acquiring control of Lamar Advertising without the approval of the board of directors. These provisions:

In addition, Section 203 of the DGCL generally limits the Company’s ability to engage in any business combination with certain persons who own 15% or more of its outstanding voting stock or any of its associates or affiliates who at any time in the past three years have owned 15% or more of its outstanding voting stock.

These provisions may have the effect of entrenching the Company’s management team and may deprive you of the opportunity to sell your shares to potential acquirers at a premium over prevailing prices. This potential inability to obtain a control premium could reduce the price of Lamar Advertising common stock.

Legislative or other actions affecting REITs could have a negative effect on Lamar Advertising and its subsidiaries.

At any time, the U.S. federal income tax laws governing REITs or the administrative and judicial interpretations of those laws may be amended or interpreted in a different manner. Federal and state tax laws are constantly under review by persons involved in the legislative process, the IRS, the U.S. Department of the Treasury, and state taxing authorities. Changes to the tax laws, regulations and administrative and judicial interpretations, which may have retroactive application, could adversely affect Lamar Advertising and its subsidiaries. The Company cannot predict with certainty whether, when, in what forms, or with what effective dates, the tax laws, regulations and administrative and judicial interpretations applicable to Lamar Advertising may be changed. Accordingly, the Company cannot assure you that any such change will not significantly affect Lamar Advertising’s ability to qualify for taxation as a REIT or the federal income tax consequences to it of such qualification.

21

The ability of the board of directors of Lamar Advertising to revoke its REIT election, without stockholder approval, may cause adverse consequences to i ts stockholders.

The Lamar Advertising charter provides that the board of directors may revoke or otherwise terminate the REIT election, without the approval of its stockholders, if the board determines that it is no longer in the Company’s best interest to continue to qualify as a REIT. If the Company ceases to be a REIT, it will be subject to federal income tax at regular corporate rates and state and local taxes, which may have adverse consequences on its total return to its stockholders.