SBA Communications (SBAC) Risk Analysis

We hold an aggregate of 4,068 towers through right of use agreements, pursuant to which we have the right to use and lease space on the tower to third parties, but do not own the tower. These agreements typically provide for multiple renewal periods, however, as these agreements are contractual, they may be terminated in accordance with their terms. If we were unable to renew our right of use for these agreements, then we would likely lose the revenue generated by the leasing tenants on such towers as the tenants may choose to remain on the tower to the extent feasible. In addition, as we do not own such towers, we are not a party to the ground lease agreement with the owner of the land underlying the towers. Consequently, we may not have visibility to the relationship between the land owner and the tower owner, including the term of any ground lease, and may not have the ability to promptly intervene if the land owner takes, or fails to take action, that would risk continued use of the tower, such as a sale of the parcel to a land aggregator, failure to pay taxes or condemnation actions. If the land owner was unable or unwilling to renew the ground lease with the tower owner, we could lose our ability to use the tower irrespective of our right of use agreement. For example, land owners have attempted, and may in the future attempt, to terminate our right of use agreements, which may have an adverse effect on our business and results of operations. During the year ended December 31, 2025, we generated $109.2 million of site leasing revenue from right of use towers. If we were to lose a significant number of our right to use towers it could adversely affect our site leasing revenue.

Our international, and, to a limited degree, our domestic wireless service providers have and may continue to be subject to consolidation pressures arising from competitive pressures, spectrum limitations, the significant capital expenditures necessary to build out national networks on evolving technology and governmental policies seeking to limit the telecommunications infrastructure footprint within a market. Significant consolidation among our wireless service provider customers has resulted, and is expected to continue to result, in our customers failing to renew existing leases for tower space as a result of overlapping coverage, nearby locations, or reducing future capital expenditures in the aggregate because their existing networks and expansion plans may overlap or be very similar. For example, historically, U.S. wireless service providers have grown through acquisitions. As a result, the combined companies have rationalized duplicative parts of their networks, or networks have been discontinued. During 2020, the consolidation of T-Mobile and Sprint was completed, and we began to experience non-renewal ("churn") of certain leases as a result of overlapping and adjacent Sprint leases. We currently expect that this churn will represent approximately $75.0 million of cash site leasing revenue over the next several years. We do not expect the annual churn to be uniform over this period as the timing of the churn will depend on termination rights as well as the needs of the carrier. Future consolidations of wireless service providers could significantly impact the number of our tower leases that are not renewed or the number of new leases that our wireless service provider customers require to expand their networks, which could materially and adversely affect our future operating results.

To remain qualified as a REIT, we are required generally to distribute at least 90% of our REIT taxable income after the utilization of any available NOLs (determined without regard to the dividends paid deduction and excluding net capital gain) each year to our shareholders. Our determination as to the timing or amount of future dividends will be based on a number of factors, including investment opportunities around our core business and the availability of our existing NOLs. To the extent that we satisfy the 90% distribution requirement but distribute less than 100% of our REIT taxable income (after the application of available NOLs, if any), we will be subject to U.S. federal corporate income tax on our undistributed taxable income. In addition, we will be subject to a 4% nondeductible excise tax if the actual amount that we pay out to our shareholders for a calendar year is less than a minimum amount specified under the Code. From time to time, we may generate REIT taxable income greater than our cash flow as a result of differences in timing between the recognition of taxable income and the actual receipt of cash or the effect of nondeductible capital expenditures, the creation of reserves or required debt or amortization payments. If we do not have other funds available in these situations, we may need to borrow funds, sell assets or raise equity, even if the then-prevailing market conditions are not favorable for these borrowings, sales, or offerings, to enable us to satisfy the REIT distribution requirement and to avoid U.S. federal corporate income tax and the 4% excise tax in a particular year. These alternatives could increase our costs and our leverage, decrease our profitability, or require us to distribute amounts that would otherwise be invested in future acquisitions, new tower builds, or stock repurchases. Thus, compliance with the REIT requirements may hinder our ability to grow, which could adversely affect the value of our common stock. Furthermore, compliance with the REIT distribution requirements may increase the financing we need to fund capital expenditures, future growth, or expansion initiatives, which would increase our total leverage. In addition to the 90% distribution requirement, to remain qualified as a REIT for federal income tax purposes, we must continually satisfy tests concerning, among other things, the nature and diversification of our assets, the sources of our income and the amounts we distribute to our shareholders. Compliance with these tests will require us to refrain from certain activities and may hinder our ability to make certain attractive investments, including the purchase of non-qualifying assets, the expansion of non-real estate activities, or investments in the businesses to be conducted by our TRSs. Furthermore, our ability to compete for acquisition opportunities in domestic and international markets may be adversely affected if we need, or require, the target company to comply with certain REIT requirements. Moreover, if we fail to comply with certain asset ownership tests, at the end of any calendar quarter, we must correct the failure within 30 days after the end of the calendar quarter or qualify for certain statutory relief provisions to avoid losing our REIT qualification and suffering adverse tax consequences. As a result, we may be required to liquidate assets in adverse market conditions or forgo otherwise attractive investments. These actions may have the effect of reducing our income, amounts available for distributions to our shareholders, and amounts available for making payments on our indebtedness.

We are periodically subject to a number of tax examinations by taxing authorities in the states and countries where we do business. We also have significant net operating losses ("NOLs") in U.S. federal and state taxing jurisdictions. Generally, for U.S. federal and state tax purposes, NOLs generated prior to the 2018 tax year can be carried forward and used for up to 20 years, and all of our NOLs will remain subject to examination until three years after our NOLs are used or expire. NOLs generated starting in the 2018 tax year can be carried forward indefinitely but are subject to the 80% utilization limitation. We expect that we will continue to be subject to tax examinations in the future. In addition, U.S. federal, state, and local, as well as international, tax laws and regulations are extremely complex and subject to varying interpretations. If our tax benefits, including from our use of NOLs or other tax attributes, are challenged successfully by a taxing authority, we may be required to pay additional taxes or penalties, or make additional distributions, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition. In addition, the use of our NOLs depends on the effectiveness of our tax strategy and structure. REIT qualification requirements impose limitations that may restrict our flexibility to adjust our tax planning or organizational structure, which could limit or delay our ability to utilize these NOLs. We are subject to income tax and other taxes in the geographic areas where we hold assets or operate, and we periodically receive notifications of audits, assessments, or other actions by taxing authorities. In certain jurisdictions, taxing authorities may issue notices and assessments that may not be reflective of the actual tax liability for which we will ultimately be liable. In connection with a current assessment in Brazil, the taxing authorities have issued income tax deficiencies related to purchase accounting adjustments for tax years 2017 through 2020. In addition, the taxing authorities have issued income tax deficiencies related to the deductibility of foreign exchange losses on our intercompany loan for the 2020 tax year. We disagree with these assessments and are appealing with the higher appellate taxing authorities. We will continue to vigorously contest the adjustments and expect to exhaust all administrative and judicial remedies necessary to resolve the matters, which could be a lengthy process. There can be no assurance that these matters will be resolved in our favor, and an adverse outcome, or any future tax examinations involving similar assertions, could have a material effect on our results of operations or cash flows in any one period. As of December 31, 2025, we estimate the aggregate range of reasonably possible losses in excess of amounts accrued to be between zero and $109.7 million; excluding penalties and interest of $172.8 million.

A portion of the activities that support our business involve collection, storage, and transfer of sensitive data of our employees, tenants, ground lessors, and other third parties, including residential tenants as a result of our previous data center acquisitions that included a limited number of residential apartment units. In recent years, there has been increased public attention regarding the protection of personal data and security of data transfers, accompanied by legislation and regulations intended to strengthen data protection and information security. The evolving nature of privacy laws in the U.S. and the other countries where we have operations could impact our compliance costs in handling such data. Many data privacy regulations also grant private rights of action, including Brazil's General Data Protection Law and certain state laws, such as California's Consumer Privacy Act. As interpretation and enforcement of these and other future data privacy regulations and industry standards evolve, we may incur costs related to litigation or regulatory penalties if we are alleged to be non-compliant.

Our industry is highly competitive, and our wireless service provider customers often have alternatives for leasing communications infrastructure assets. We believe that tower location and capacity, quality of service, density within a geographic market, and price historically have been and will continue to be the most significant competitive factors affecting the site leasing business. However, competitive pricing pressure for tenants on towers from our competitors have and may in the future result in us entering into MLAs that may impact certain terms of existing or future individual site lease agreements. Terms that may be impacted include pricing discounts, term concessions, and equipment rights. Competition for tenants, whether or not resulting in MLAs, may materially and adversely affect our lease rates or lead to non-renewal of existing leases. Furthermore, pricing pressures could lead to more prevalent network sharing, both domestically and internationally, which could reduce the demand for our tower space or lead to non-renewals of existing leases. In addition, the increasing number of towers (1) may provide customers the ability to relocate their antennas to other towers if they determine that a more suitable, efficient or economical location exists, which could lead to non-renewal of existing leases, or (2) may adversely impact our ability to enter into new customer leases. This impact may be exacerbated if competitors construct towers near our existing towers. Any of these factors could materially and adversely affect our growth rate and our future operations. In the site leasing business, we compete with: - wireless service providers that own and operate their own towers and lease, or may in the future decide to lease, antenna space to other providers;- national and regional tower companies who may be substantially larger and have greater financial resources than we do;- international tower companies who have been in the international market for a longer period of time than we have; and - alternative facilities such as rooftops, outdoor and indoor DAS networks, billboards, and electric transmission towers. The site development segment of our industry is also competitive. There are numerous large and small companies that offer one or more of the services offered by our site development business. As a result of this competition, margins in this segment may come under pressure. Many of our competitors have lower overhead expenses and therefore may be able to provide services at prices that we consider unprofitable. If margins in this segment were to decrease, our consolidated revenues and our site development segment operating profit could be adversely affected.

We derive a significant portion of our revenue from a small number of customers. In the United States and in most of our international markets, there are only two to three primary wireless carriers. Consequently, a reduction in demand for site leasing, reduced future capital expenditures or operating expenses on the networks, or the loss, as a result of bankruptcy, merger with other customers of ours or otherwise, of any of our largest customers could materially decrease our revenue and have an adverse effect on our growth. Furthermore, while many of our tenants in our international markets are subsidiaries of global telecommunications companies, these subsidiaries may not have the explicit or implied financial support of their parent entities, which may impact their creditworthiness. Our growth projections are based on our beliefs regarding future revenue from these customers, and such projections could be adversely affected by the loss, consolidation, or financial instability of these customers. We derive revenue through numerous site leasing and site development contracts. In the United States and our international markets, each site leasing contract relates to the lease of space at an individual tower and is generally for an initial term of five years to fifteen years with multiple renewal periods at the option of the tenant. However, if any of our significant site leasing customers were to experience financial difficulty, substantially reduce their capital expenditures or reduce their dependence on leased tower space on our sites and fail to renew their leases with us, our revenues, future revenue growth, and results of operations would be adversely affected. Our site development customers engage us on a project-by-project basis, and a customer can generally terminate an assignment at any time without penalty. In addition, a customer's need for site development services can decrease, and we may not be successful in establishing relationships with new customers. Furthermore, our existing customers may not continue to engage us for additional projects. Recently, the U.S. wireless service provider market has reduced to three nationwide wireless service providers, AT&T Wireless, T-Mobile, and Verizon Wireless, and our dependence on these three wireless service providers for our financial and operational growth has been exacerbated. The following is a list of significant customers (representing at least 10% of revenue in any of the last three years) and the percentage of our total revenues for the specified time periods derived from these customers: For the year ended December 31, Percentage of Total Revenues 2025 2024 2023 T-Mobile 31.1% 30.5% 32.5%AT&T Wireless 20.3% 20.6% 19.5%Verizon Wireless 15.1% 15.1% 14.6% We also have customer concentrations with respect to revenues in each of our financial reporting segments: For the year ended December 31, Percentage of Domestic Site Leasing Revenue 2025 2024 2023 T-Mobile 36.8% 38.1% 40.2%AT&T Wireless 30.6% 29.6% 28.6%Verizon Wireless 20.4% 20.1% 19.7% For the year ended December 31, Percentage of International Site Leasing Revenue 2025 2024 2023 Telefonica 19.7% 21.3% 22.5%Claro 18.9% 19.2% 20.2%TIM 13.4% 15.9% 15.7%Tigo (1) 11.3% 5.8% 5.6%(1)The increase in site leasing revenue derived from Tigo was due to the sites purchased from Millicom during the year ended December 31, 2025. For the year ended December 31, Percentage of Site Development Revenue 2025 2024 2023 T-Mobile 77.9% 69.9% 71.5%Verizon Wireless 18.2% 20.1% 16.8%