UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

WASHINGTON, DC 20549

SCHEDULE 14A

(Rule 14a-101)

INFORMATION REQUIRED IN PROXY STATEMENT

SCHEDULE 14A INFORMATION

Proxy Statement pursuant to Section 14(a) of the

Securities Exchange Act of 1934

Filed by the Registrant  x☒                            Filed by a Party other than the Registrant  ¨☐

Check the appropriate box:

AMERISAFE, Inc.

(Name of Registrant as Specified in Its Charter)

(Name of Person(s) Filing Proxy Statement, if Other than the Registrant)

Payment of Filing Fee (Check the appropriate box):

April 29, 201628, 2017

Dear AMERISAFE Shareholder:

You are cordially invited to attend the annual meeting of shareholders of AMERISAFE, Inc. The meeting will be held on Friday, June 10, 2016,9, 2017, beginning at 9:00 a.m. at our corporate headquarters, which are located at 2301 Highway 190 West in DeRidder, Louisiana 70634.

Information about the meeting, including the nominees for election as directors and the other proposals to be considered is presented in the following notice of annual meeting and proxy statement. At the meeting, management will report on the Company’s operations during 20152016 and comment on our outlook for the remainder of 2016.2017. The report will be followed by a question and answer period.

We hope that you will attend the annual meeting. It is important that your shares be represented. Accordingly, please vote using the internet or telephone procedures described on the proxy card or sign, date and promptly mail the enclosed proxy card in the enclosedpre-addressed, postage-paid envelope.

We would also likeAustin Young will retire from the Board following the annual meeting. Austin and I have served together on the Board since the Company went public in 2005. His leadership as a Board member and as Audit Committee Chair has been instrumental, especially in our early years as a public company. On behalf of the Board and all AMERISAFE employees, I want to thank Allen BradleyAustin for his leadership to AMERISAFE. Allen retired on April 22nd after over 20 years of service to the Company. He served in a number of key management roles at AMERISAFE, including as CEO from 2003 through 2015 and as Chairman of the Board from 2005 until April 2016. Allen led AMERISAFE in its initial public offering and the Company in the most profitable years in its history. Allen leaves a lasting imprint on AMERISAFE and we wish him the best in his retirement.

We look forward to seeing you at the meeting on June 10th.9th.

Sincerely,

Jared A. Morris

Chairman

AMERISAFE, INC.

NOTICE OF ANNUAL MEETING OF SHAREHOLDERS

To be held on June 10, 20169, 2017

The 20162017 annual meeting of shareholders of AMERISAFE, Inc. (the “Company”) will be held on June 10, 2016,9, 2017, beginning at 9:00 a.m. at the Company’s corporate headquarters, which are located at 2301 Highway 190 West in DeRidder, Louisiana 70634. The meeting will be held for the following purposes:

Information concerning the matters to be voted upon at the meeting is set forth in the accompanying proxy statement. Also enclosed is the Company’s annual report for the year ended December 31, 2015.2016. Holders of record of the Company’s common stock as of the close of business on April 18, 201617, 2017 are entitled to notice of, and to vote at, the meeting.

If you plan to attend the meeting and will need special assistance or accommodation, please describe your needs on the enclosed proxy card.

By Order of the Board of Directors,

Kathryn H. Shirley

Executive Vice President,

General Counsel and Secretary

DeRidder, Louisiana

April 29, 201628, 2017

Table of ContentsTABLE OF CONTENTS

AMERISAFE, Inc.

2301 Highway 190 West

DeRidder, Louisiana 70634

PROXY STATEMENT

This proxy statement provides information in connection with the solicitation of proxies by the Board of Directors (the “Board”) of AMERISAFE, Inc. (the “Company”) for use at the Company’s 20162017 annual meeting of shareholders or any postponement or adjournment thereof (the “Annual Meeting”). This proxy statement also provides information you will need in order to consider and act upon the matters specified in the accompanying notice of annual meeting. This proxy statement and the enclosed proxy card are being mailed to shareholders on or about May 2, 2016.2017.

Record holders of the Company’s common stock as of the close of business on April 18, 201617, 2017 are entitled to vote at the Annual Meeting. Each record holder of common stock on that date is entitled to one vote at the Annual Meeting for each share of common stock held. As of April 18, 2016,17, 2017, there were 20,440,124 shares19,230,135shares of common stock outstanding.

You cannot vote your shares unless you are present at the Annual Meeting or you have properly executed your proxy. You can vote by proxy in one of three convenient ways:

You may revoke your proxy at any time prior to the vote at the Annual Meeting by:

Unless revoked as described above, all properly executed proxies will be voted at the Annual Meeting in accordance with your directions on the proxy. If a properly executed proxy gives no specific instructions, the shares of common stock represented by your proxy will be voted:

If you own shares of common stock held in “street name” and you do not instruct your broker how to vote your shares using the instructions your broker provides you, your shares will be voted in the ratification of the

- 1 -

appointment of Ernst & Young as the Company’s independent registered public accounting firm for 2016,2017, but not for any other proposal. To be sure your shares are voted in the manner you desire, you should instruct your broker how to vote your shares.

Holders of a majority of the outstanding shares of the Company’s common stock must be present, either in person or by proxy, to constitute a quorum necessary to conduct the Annual Meeting. Abstentions and brokernon-votes are counted for purposes of determining a quorum and are considered present and entitled to vote.

The following table sets forth the voting requirements, whether broker discretionary voting is allowed and the treatment of abstentions and brokernon-votes for each of the matters to be voted on at the Annual Meeting.

The Company pays the costs of soliciting proxies. We have engaged Georgeson, Inc. to serve as our proxy solicitor for the Annual Meeting at a base fee of $8,500 plus reimbursement of reasonable expenses. Georgeson

- 2 -

will conduct our broker search, solicit banks, brokers, institutional investors and hedge funds to determine voting instructions, monitor voting and deliver executed proxies to our voting tabulator. Our employees also may solicit proxies by telephone or in person. However, they will not receive additional compensation for soliciting proxies. The Company may request banks, brokers and other custodians, nominees and fiduciaries to forward copies of these proxy materials to the beneficial holders and to request instructions for the execution of proxies. The Company may reimburse these persons for their related expenses. Proxies are solicited to provide all record holders of the Company’s common stock an opportunity to vote on the matters to be presented at the Annual Meeting, even if they cannot attend the meeting in person.

- 3 -

PROPOSAL 1

ELECTION OF DIRECTORS

At the Annual Meeting, threetwo directors will be elected to serve three-year terms expiring at our annual shareholder meeting in 2019.2020. This section of the proxy statement contains information relating to the director nominees and the directors whose terms of office continue after the Annual Meeting. The director nominees were selected by the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee and approved by the Board for submission to the shareholders. The nominees for election are Teri Fontenot, Jared A. MorrisMichael J. Brown and Daniel Phillips. AllG. Janelle Frost. Both currently serve as directors.

The Board recommends a vote “FOR” the election of each of the nominees.

Nominees to be elected for terms expiring at the Annual Meeting in 2019

Teri Fontenot, age 62, has served as a director of the Company since January 1, 2016. Ms. Fontenot is the President and Chief Executive Officer of Woman’s Hospital, a position she has held since 1996. She is chair of the Louisiana Hospital Association Professional and General Liability Trust Fund and is on the Baton Rouge advisory board for IBERIABANK.

Ms. Fontenot brings to the Board substantial experience as the chief executive officer of a healthcare institution and as chair of an insurance provider. Her experience in the healthcare and insurance industries provide her with valuable insight into the issues affecting the Company and our policyholders.

Jared A. Morris, age 41, has served as a director of the Company since 2005. In November 2012, he was appointed by the Board to serve as our lead director. He was appointed as Chairman of the Board effective April 23, 2016, upon the retirement of Allen Bradley. Since 2002, he has been an officer and a principal owner of Marine One Acceptance Corporation and Dumont Land, LLC, both of which are specialty finance companies. Since 2002, he has also served as an officer of Dumont Management Group, LLC, a privately held company that provides management services to various affiliated finance and investment companies. He serves on the board of directors of First National Bank of DeRidder and Beauregard Memorial Hospital. Jared A. Morris is the son of Millard E. Morris.

Jared A. Morris is currently our Chairman of the Board and the chair of the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee. In these capacities, he has taken a lead role in developing and maintaining the Company’s corporate governance policies and practices. His experience and training in financial and credit management, as well as business investment, also enhance the Board’s business sophistication.

Daniel Phillips, age 69, has served as a director of the Company since 2007. Mr. Phillips is President and Chief Executive Officer of PAX, Inc., a supplier of fabricated heavy industrial steel to the petrochemical, petroleum refining, and power industries, headquartered in Baton Rouge, Louisiana. He founded PAX, Inc. in 1979, and has been an owner and officer of that company since that time.

Mr. Phillips brings to the Board substantial experience as the founder and chief executive officer of an industrial company that typifies many of the Company’s insurance clients. His experience as a CEO provides him with a unique perspective on leadership and issues affecting the Company and its clients.

Current directors whose terms expire at the Annual Meeting in 20172020

Michael J. Brown, age 52,53, has served as a director of the Company since November 2014. Mr. Brown is the Vice Chairman and Chief Operating Officer of Iberiabank Corp., a position he has held since September 2009. In that role, he manages Iberiabank’s retail and commercial banking operations in Louisiana, Arkansas, Florida, Alabama, Texas and Tennessee. From 2001 to 2009, Mr. Brown served as Senior Executive Vice President of Iberiabank Corp. Prior to joining Iberiabank in 1999, Mr. Brown was a managing director with Bank One Capital Markets.

Mr. Brown’s experience in the financial services industry in a number of the Company’s key markets makes him well qualified to serve as a director of the Company.

Austin P. Young IIIG. Janelle Frost,, C.P.A., age 75,46, has served as a director of the CompanyDirector since 2005. Mr. YoungApril 2016. Ms. Frost has served as Senior Vicethe Company’s Chief Executive Officer since April 2015 and President since September 2013. Prior to becoming Chief FinancialExecutive Officer, and Treasurer of CellStar Corporation, a logistics service provider to the wireless communications industry, from 1999 until his retirement in December 2001. From 1996 to 1999, heMs. Frost served as Chief Operating Officer from May 2013 to April 2015. She served as Executive Vice President-Finance and Administration of Metamor Worldwide, Inc., a national staffing and systems consulting firm. Mr. Young was also Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of American General Corporation, an insurancefrom November 2008 to April 2013 and financial services holding company, for more than eight years. He was a partner inController from May 2004 to November 2008. She has been employed with the Houston and New York offices of KPMG LLP for 12 years before joining American General Corporation. Mr. YoungCompany since 1992. Ms. Frost currently serves as lead independent director and chairmanon the board of directors of the audit committeeFederal Reserve Bank of Insperity, Inc., a human resources outsourcing company. He previously served as a directorAtlanta’s New Orleans Branch.

Ms. Frost’s over 20 years of Tower Group International, Ltd., a propertyexperience with the Company and casualty insurance holding company, from 2004 to September 2014. He holds an accounting degree fromher performance in numerous roles with the University of Texas and is a licensed Certified Public Accountant in Texas. He is a memberCompany gives herin-depth knowledge of the HoustonCompany’s business and State Chapters ofinsurance industry. Her tenure with the Texas Society of Certified Public Accountants, the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants, and Financial Executives International.

Mr. Young’s significant experience as a partner at an international accounting firm and in senior financial positions at various companies provides a solid background that enables him to advise the Board on financial and audit-related matters. This experience also enables him to serve as an “audit committee financial expert.” Additionally, his prior service on the boards of other public companies, including one in the insurance industry,Company provides valuable insight as toabout operational and strategic matters impacting the current trends in the insurance industry and in public company governance.Company.

Current directors whose terms expire at the Annual Meeting in 2018

Philip A. Garcia, age 59,60, has served as a director of the Company since 2010. He retired from the Erie Insurance Group in April 2009, where he served as Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer for the final 12 years of his28-year career with that company. Mr. Garcia was a director of Donegal Group Inc. from December 2009 to May 2011. He was previously a licensed Certified Public Accountant in Pennsylvania.

Mr. Garcia possesses a strong background in financial, accounting and investment management with a publicly traded property and casualty insurance company, as evidenced by his prior service as Chief Financial Officer of Erie Insurance Group. He brings substantial experience in the insurance industry to the Board, including a strategic understanding of the operations of a property and casualty insurance company, as well as an understanding of the current economic and other challenges facing our industry. His experience enables him to serve on the Audit Committee as an “audit committee financial expert.”

Millard E. Morris, age 71,72, founded the Company in 1985. He was our Chairman, Chief Executive Officer and principal shareholder until the Company was sold to a private investment group in 1997. He served on the Company’s Board from 1985 until 2005, when he voluntarily retired from our Board prior to the Company’s

- 4 -

initial public offering. Mr. Morris wasre-elected to the Board in June 2007. From 1996 until 2015, he served as the managing member of Dumont Management Group, LLC, a privately held company that provides management services to various affiliated finance and investment companies. Millard E. Morris is the father of Jared A. Morris.

Millard E. Morris’s experience as founder of the Company and his long-term service as a director give him unique knowledge of the opportunities and challenges associated with the Company’s business. His familiarity with the Company and the insurance industry make him uniquely qualified to serve as a director of the Company.

Randy Roach, age 65,66, has served as a director of the Company since March 2007. Mr. Roach has been the Mayor of Lake Charles, Louisiana since 2000. Prior to assuming his duties as Mayor, Mr. Roach was engaged in the practice of law focusing on real estate and commercial law. Mr. Roach has been a member of the Louisiana State Bar Association since 1976. He is a director of The First National Bank of Louisiana. He is also a former member of the House of Representatives of the Louisiana Legislature.

Mr. Roach’s experience as a government official brings valuable insight to the Board given that the Company operates in a highly regulated industry. Mr. Roach’s background as an attorney, legislator and government official is particularly helpful in his role as a member of the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee.

Nominees to be elected for terms expiring at the Annual Meeting in 2019

Teri Fontenot, age 63, has served as a director of the Company since January 2016. Ms. Fontenot is the President and Chief Executive Officer of Woman’s Hospital, a position she has held since 1996. Ms. Fontenot recently served for six years on the American Hospital Association Board and was the chair in 2012. Ms. Fontenot currently serves as a director for Landauer, Inc., a provider of analytical services to determine personnel exposure to occupational and environmental radiation hazards in the workplace.

Ms. Fontenot brings to the Board substantial experience as a chief executive officer and former chief financial officer of healthcare institutions and as chair of an insurance provider. She is also an inactive certified public accountant. Her experience in the healthcare and insurance industries provide her with valuable insight into the issues affecting the Company and our policyholders. This experience enables her to serve on the Audit Committee has an “audit committee financial expert.”

Jared A. Morris, age 41, has served as a director of the Company since 2005. He served as our lead director from November 2012 until he was appointed Chairman of the Board in April 2016. Since 2002, he has been an officer and a principal owner of Marine One Acceptance Corporation and Dumont Land, LLC, both of which are specialty finance companies. Since 2002, he has also served as an officer of Dumont Management Group, LLC, a privately held company that provides management services to various affiliated finance and investment companies. He serves on the board of directors of First National Bank of DeRidder and Beauregard Memorial Hospital. Jared A. Morris is the son of Millard E. Morris.

Jared A. Morris is currently our Chairman of the Board and the former chair of the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee. In these capacities, he has taken a lead role in developing and maintaining the Company’s corporate governance policies and practices. His experience and training in financial and credit management, as well as business investment, enhance the Board’s business sophistication.

Daniel Phillips, age 70, has served as a director of the Company since 2007. Mr. Phillips is President and Chief Executive Officer of PAX, LLC, a supplier of fabricated heavy industrial steel to the petrochemical, petroleum refining, and power industries, headquartered in Baton Rouge, Louisiana. He founded PAX, LLC in 1979, and has been an owner and officer of that company since that time.

Mr. Phillips brings to the Board substantial experience as the founder and chief executive officer of an industrial company that typifies many of the Company’s insurance clients. His experience as a CEO provides him with a unique perspective on leadership and issues affecting the Company and its clients.

- 5 -

PROPOSAL 2

RE-APPROVAL OF THE MATERIAL TERMS FOR QUALIFIED PERFORMANCE-BASED COMPENSATION UNDER THE COMPANY’S 2012 EQUITY AND INCENTIVE COMPENSATION PLAN

The 2012 AMERISAFE, Inc. Equity and Incentive Compensation Plan (the “Incentive Plan”) was approved at the Company’s annual meeting in June 2012. The Incentive Plan continues to afford the Compensation Committee with the flexibility to design equity-based compensation awards that are responsive to the Company’s business needs and authorizes a variety of awards designed to advance the interests and long-term success of the Company.

Shareholders are not being asked to approve orre-approve the Incentive Plan. Instead, shareholders are being asked to approveonly the material terms for “qualified performance-based compensation” under the Incentive Plan for purposes of the approval requirements under Section 162(m) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “Code”). This approval is intended to preserve the Company’s ability to potentially design certain types of awards under the Incentive Plan so that they may be able to satisfy the requirements for “qualified performance-based compensation” and may permit the Company to benefit from certain tax deductions, under Section 162(m) of the Code.

Section 162(m) of the Code disallows a deduction for certain compensation paid to our Chief Executive Officer and to each of our other three most highly compensated executive officers, other than our Chief Financial Officer, in a taxable year to the extent that compensation to such covered employee exceeds $1 million for such year. However, some types of compensation, including “qualified performance-based compensation” under Section 162(m) of the Code, are not subject to the deduction limit if the compensation satisfies the requirements of Section 162(m) of the Code. The deduction limit does not apply to compensation paid under a shareholder-approved plan that meets certain requirements for “qualified performance-based compensation” under Section 162(m) of the Code. While we believe it is in the best interests of the Company and its shareholders to have the ability to potentially grant “qualified performance-based compensation” under the Incentive Plan, we may decide to grant compensation to covered employees that will not qualify as “qualified performance-based compensation” for purposes of Section 162(m) of the Code. Moreover, even if we intend to grant compensation that qualifies as “qualified performance-based compensation” for purposes of Section 162(m) of the Code under the Incentive Plan, we cannot guarantee that such compensation will so qualify or will ultimately be deductible by the Company.

Generally, compensation attributable to performance-based awards may be deemed to qualify as “qualified performance-based compensation” under Section 162(m) of the Code if:

Shareholder approval of this proposal is intended to satisfy the shareholder approval requirements of Section 162(m) of the Code.

The Company is seeking shareholder approval of the material terms for “qualified performance-based compensation” under the Incentive Plan, including the performance measures and grant limits under the

- 6 -

Incentive Plan, as well as the individuals eligible to receive awards under the Incentive Plan. This would provide the Company flexibility to potentially grant awards under the Incentive Plan that may be fully deductible for federal income tax purposes. If the Company’s shareholders approve the material terms for “qualified performance-based compensation” under the Incentive Plan, assuming that all other requirements under Section 162(m) of the Code are met, we may be able to obtain tax deductions with respect to awards issued under the Incentive Plan to our covered employees without regard to the limitations of Section 162(m) of the Code until our 2022 annual meeting of shareholders (in other words, for about five years). If the Company’s shareholders do not approve this proposal, the Company will generally be limited in its ability to make certain performance-based awards.

The Company is not seeking to increase the number of shares available for issuance or to adjust any of the individual award limits contained in the Incentive Plan, nor is the Company amending the Incentive Plan in any way.

A copy of the Incentive Plan is attached to this proxy statement as Annex A. The following description of the Incentive Plan is only a summary of its principal terms and provisions and is qualified by reference to the actual text as set forth in Annex A.

Section 162(m) Performance Measures

As discussed above, the Company’s only reason for submitting this proposal to shareholders is to obtain shareholder approval of the material terms for “qualified performance-based compensation” under the Incentive Plan for purposes of Section 162(m) of the Code. This shareholder approval is expected to enable us to structure certain awards so that those awards may be able to qualify as “qualified performance-based compensation” under Section 162(m) of the Code.

In particular, the Incentive Plan includes a list of performance measures upon which the Compensation Committee must condition a grant or vesting of a “qualified performance-based award” pursuant to the Incentive Plan, which measures are as follows:

In addition to these performance measures, the Incentive Plan also includes individual grant limits for equity or incentive awards that can be granted pursuant to the Incentive Plan and specifies the classes of individuals eligible to receive awards under the Incentive Plan, as further described below.

The affirmative vote of a majority of the holders of our common stock entitled to vote and present at the Annual Meeting is required to approve the material terms for qualified performance-based compensation under the Incentive Plan. Accordingly, abstentions will have the effect of a vote against this proposal. Brokernon-votes will not have any effect on the adoption of this proposal.

- 7 -

You should read and understand the terms of the Incentive Plan before you vote.

The Board recommends a vote “FOR” approval of the material terms

for qualified performance-based compensation under the Incentive Plan.

Summary of the Incentive Plan

Purpose.The purpose of the Incentive Plan is to attract, retain and motivatenon-employee directors, officers, key employees and consultants by providing incentives for superior performance. The Board believes that equity-based incentive compensation programs are an important element of our continued financial and operational success, and that the Incentive Plan will serve the dual purpose of motivating key individuals to achieve performance objectives related to our overall goal of increasing shareholder value and further aligning the interests of these key individuals with those of our shareholders.

Term. The Incentive Plan will terminate on June 15, 2022, the tenth anniversary of the date our shareholders approved the Incentive Plan. The Board may, in its discretion, terminate the Incentive Plan at any time. In either event, termination will not affect the rights of participants under any awards then outstanding under the Incentive Plan.

Eligibility. Current officers, other employees and consultants of the Company and its subsidiaries,non-employee directors of the Company, and prospective officers and employees of the Company and its subsidiaries who have agreed to commence serving within 90 days of the date of grant of an award are eligible to participate in the Incentive Plan, provided that those persons are selected by the Compensation Committee to receive awards under the Incentive Plan. Approximately 420 employees (not including officers), 12 officers, including four executive officers, and eightnon-employee directors currently qualify to participate in the Incentive Plan. The Compensation Committee will determine which persons will receive awards and the number of shares subject to such awards. Although all employees are eligible to receive awards under the Incentive Plan, the Compensation Committee generally makes awards under the Incentive Plan only to senior management.

Incentive Plan Limits. The maximum number of shares of common stock, par value $0.01 per share that may be issued or transferred:

will not in the aggregate exceed 500,000 shares of common stock (subject to adjustment as described in the Incentive Plan), which may be original issue shares or treasury shares or a combination of the two. As of April 17, 2017, 355,777 shares of common stock are available for future issuance under the Incentive Plan.

The Incentive Plan provides that shares of common stock covered by an award will not be counted as used unless and until the shares are actually issued and delivered to a recipient. Therefore, the total number of shares of common stock available under the Incentive Plan as of a given date will not be reduced by any shares relating to prior awards that have expired or have been forfeited and cancelled. Upon payment in cash of the benefit

- 8 -

provided by any award granted under the Incentive Plan, any shares of common stock that were covered by that award will again be available for issue or transfer. The Incentive Plan also provides that:

The number of shares of common stock actually issued or transferred by the Company upon the exercise of ISOs (as defined below) will not in the aggregate exceed 500,000 shares, subject to adjustment as provided for in the Incentive Plan.

The Incentive Plan also provides the following additional limits, subject to adjustment as provided in the Incentive Plan:

Description of Awards. The Incentive Plan is an “omnibus” plan under which the Compensation Committee can make cash and equity-based awards in the form of restricted shares, restricted stock units, option rights, appreciation rights, cash incentive awards, performance shares and units, and other types of awards. Each award under the Incentive Plan will be made pursuant to an agreement containing such terms and provisions, consistent with the Incentive Plan, as our Compensation Committee may approve.

Restricted Shares. A grant of restricted shares constitutes an immediate transfer of ownership of the shares of common stock to the recipient in consideration of the recipient’s performance of services. Generally, restricted shares must be subject to a “substantial risk of forfeiture,” within the meaning of Section 83 of the Code, for a period to be determined by our Compensation Committee on the date of grant or until specified management objectives are achieved. Subject to the substantial risk of forfeiture, restricted shares entitle the recipient to dividend, voting and other ownership rights.

- 9 -

If the elimination of restrictions is based only on the passage of time, the period of time will be no shorter than three years, except that restrictions may be removed ratably during the three-year period, on an annual basis, as determined by our Compensation Committee on the grant date.

Any grant of restricted shares may specify management objectives which, if achieved, will result in termination or early termination of the restrictions applicable to such shares. Any restricted shares that vest upon the achievement of management objectives may not vest sooner than one year from the grant date. The transferability of restricted shares is prohibited or restricted in a manner prescribed by our Compensation Committee on the date of grant for the period during which such forfeiture provisions are to continue.

Any grant or sale may require that any or all dividends or other distributions paid on the restricted shares during the period of such restrictions be automatically deferred and reinvested in additional restricted shares, in which case these additional restricted shares would be subject to the same restrictions as the underlying award. Dividends or other distributions on restricted shares with restrictions that lapse as a result of the achievement of management objectives will be deferred until and paid contingent upon the achievement of the applicable management objectives.

Restricted Stock Units. A grant of restricted stock units constitutes an agreement by the Company to deliver shares of common stock or cash to the recipient in the future in consideration of the performance of services, but subject to the fulfillment of such conditions during the restriction period as our Compensation Committee may specify. During the applicable restriction period, the recipient may not transfer any rights under the award, will have no rights of ownership in any shares of common stock deliverable upon payment of the restricted stock units, and will have no right to vote those shares. Our Compensation Committee may, at the grant date, authorize the payment of dividend equivalents on restricted stock units on either a current, deferred or contingent basis, either in cash or in additional shares of common stock. However, dividends or other distributions on shares underlying restricted stock units with restrictions that lapse as a result of the achievement of specified management objectives will be deferred until and paid contingently upon the achievement of the applicable management objectives.

Restricted stock units with a restriction period that lapses only by the passage of time will have a restriction period of at least three years, except that the restriction period may expire ratably during the three-year period, on an annual basis, as determined by our Compensation Committee at the grant date. If the restricted stock units have a restriction period that lapses only upon the achievement of management objectives, the restriction period cannot lapse sooner than one year from the date of grant.

Each grant or sale of restricted stock units will also specify the time and manner of payment of the restricted stock units that have been earned.

Option Rights. Option rights provide the recipient with the right to purchase shares of common stock at a price not less than their fair market value on the date of the grant. As of April 17, 2017, the fair market value of our common stock was $64.70 per share. The option price is payable in cash, check or wire transfer, in nonforfeitable and unrestricted shares of common stock already owned by the optionee, through any net exercise arrangement established by our Compensation Committee, by any combination of these methods, or by any other method approved by the Compensation Committee. To the extent permitted by law, a grant of option rights may provide for the deferred payment of the option price on the sale of some or all of the shares obtained from the exercise.

Option rights granted under the Incentive Plan may be option rights that are intended to qualify as incentive stock options, or ISOs, within the meaning of Section 422 of the Code. ISOs may be granted only to participants who meet the definition of “employees” under Section 3401(c) of the Code.

No option rights may be exercised more than 10 years from the date of grant. Each grant of an option right will specify the period of continuous service that is necessary before the option right becomes exercisable. Any

- 10 -

grant of option rights may specify management objectives that must be achieved as a condition to exercise the option rights. Option rights will not provide for any dividends or dividend equivalents.

Appreciation Rights. Appreciation rights provide the recipient with the right to receive from the Company an amount, determined by our Compensation Committee and expressed as a percentage (not exceeding 100%) of the difference between the base price established for the appreciation rights and the market value of the common stock on the date the rights are exercised. Appreciation rights can be tandem (i.e., granted with option rights to provide an alternative to the exercise of the option rights) or free-standing.

Tandem appreciation rights may only be exercised at a time when the related option right is exercisable and the spread is positive, and require that the related option right be surrendered for cancellation. Free-standing appreciation rights must have a base price per right that is not less than the fair market value of the common stock on the grant date, must specify the period of continuous employment that is necessary before such appreciation rights become exercisable and may not be exercisable more than 10 years from the grant date.

When exercised, appreciation rights may be paid by the Company in cash, common stock or a combination of the two. Any grant of appreciation rights may specify (a) management objectives that must be achieved as a condition to exercising such rights, (b) waiting periods before appreciation rights become exercisable and (c) permissible dates or periods on or during which appreciation rights are exercisable. Appreciation rights will not provide for any dividends or dividend equivalents.

Cash Incentive Awards, Performance Shares and Performance Units. A cash incentive award is a cash award. A performance share is a bookkeeping entry equivalent to one share of common stock and a performance unit is a bookkeeping entry equivalent to $1.00 or such other value as determined by our Compensation Committee. Under a grant of a cash incentive award, performance shares or performance units, the Company identifies one or more management objectives that must be met within a specified period (not less than one year). Our Compensation Committee also establishes a minimum level of acceptable achievement for the recipient. If, by the end of the performance period, the recipient has achieved the specified management objectives, the recipient will be deemed to have fully earned the cash incentive award, performance shares or performance units, as the case may be. If the recipient has not achieved the management objectives, but has attained or exceeded the predetermined minimum level of acceptable achievement, the recipient may earn a portion of the cash incentive award, performance shares or performance units, as the case may be.

To the extent earned, the cash incentive award, performance shares or performance units will be paid to the recipient at the time and in the manner determined by our Compensation Committee in cash, shares of common stock or a combination of the two. The grant of performance shares may provide for the payment of dividend equivalents in cash or in shares, subject in all cases to deferral and payment on a contingent basis based on the recipient’s earning of the performance shares or performance units with respect to which such dividend equivalents are paid.

Awards toNon-employee Directors. The Compensation Committee may make grants tonon-employee directors of option rights, appreciation rights or other awards, and may grant or sell tonon-employee directors shares of common stock, restricted shares or restricted share units. Awards granted tonon-employee directors will not be subject to any minimum vesting period. Any option rights or free-standing appreciation rights granted to anon-employee director will not be granted at a price less than the fair market value per share on the date of grant and will expire not more than ten years from the date of grant.

In addition,non-employee directors may be awarded, or may be permitted to elect to receive, pursuant to procedures established by the Board, all or any portion of their annual retainer, meeting fees or other fees in shares of common stock, restricted shares, restricted share units or other awards under the Incentive Plan in lieu of cash.

- 11 -

At the present time, the Compensation Committee does not expect to make awards under the Incentive Plan tonon-employee directors. Currently, allnon-employee directors receive a portion of their compensation in the form of restricted stock under a separate plan. See “The Board, Its Committees and Its Compensation—Director Compensation.”

Other Awards. Our Compensation Committee may grant to participants cash awards or other awards (which may include rights to dividends and dividend equivalents) that are denominated or payable in, valued in whole or in part by reference to, or otherwise based on or related to our common stock or factors that may influence the value of our shares.

Our Compensation Committee will determine the terms and conditions of any of these other awards at the time of grant, and may specify management objectives, or a minimum level of acceptable achievement, that must be met within a specified period prior to any payment, in whole or in part, being made on such awards. Any shares or restricted common stock that vest upon the achievement of management objectives may not vest earlier than one year from the grant date.

Our Compensation Committee may also require that an award only vest on the passage of time rather than the achievement of management objectives. If the elimination of restrictions is based only on the passage of time, the period of time will be no shorter than three years, except that restrictions may be removed ratably during the three-year period, on an annual basis, as determined by our Compensation Committee on the grant date.

Management Objectives. The Incentive Plan requires that our Compensation Committee establish “management objectives” for purposes of cash incentive awards, performance shares and performance units. When determined by our Compensation Committee, option rights, appreciation rights, restricted shares, restricted stock units, dividend equivalents or other awards may also specify management objectives. Management objectives may be described in terms of Company-wide objectives or objectives that are related to the performance of the individual recipient or the recipient’s division, department, region or function within the Company or subsidiary of the Company. Management objectives may be made relative to the performance of other companies or subsidiaries, divisions, departments, regions or functions within such other companies, and may be made relative to an index or one or more of the performance objectives.

Our Compensation Committee may grant awards subject to management objectives that are either intended or not intended to qualify as “qualified performance-based compensation” under Section 162(m) of the Code. Management objectives applicable to any award intended to qualify as “qualified performance-based compensation” under Section 162(m) of the Code must be based on one or more, or a combination, of the criteria described above in this Proposal 2 under the caption “Section 162(m) Performance Measures.”

Except in the case of such award intended to qualify as “qualified performance-based compensation” under Section 162(m) of the Code (other than in connection with a change in control of the Company) where such action would result in the Company’s loss of the exemption of the award under Section 162(m), if our Compensation Committee determines that a change in the business, operations, corporate structure or capital structure of the Company, or the manner in which it conducts its business, or other events or circumstances render the management objectives unsuitable, our Compensation Committee may, in its discretion, modify such management objectives or the related minimum acceptable level of achievement, in whole or in part, as our Compensation Committee deems appropriate and equitable.

Administration. Our Compensation Committee, as constituted from time to time, will administer and interpret the Incentive Plan. The Compensation Committee will be composed of not less than two directors, each of whom must (a) be a“non-employee director” within the meaning of Rule16b-3 and (b) be an “outside director” within the meaning of Section 162(m) of the Code. The Compensation Committee may from time to time delegate all or any part of its authority under the Incentive Plan to a subcommittee.

- 12 -

The Compensation Committee may delegate certain administrative powers to officers of the Company, including the powers to designate employees to be recipients of the awards granted under the Incentive Plan and to determine the size and type of the awards granted. Officers may not, however, grant awards to the Company’s directors, officers or beneficial owners of more than 10% of any class of the Company’s equity securities. Any resolution authorizing administrative powers to an officer must set forth the total number of shares related to the awards the officer may grant and the terms of the awards, and the officer must report periodically to our Compensation Committee regarding awards granted pursuant to the delegated authority.

Except in connection with certain corporate transactions described in the Incentive Plan, the terms of outstanding awards may not be amended to reduce the option price of outstanding option rights or the base price of outstanding appreciation rights, or cancel outstanding option rights or appreciation rights in exchange for cash, other awards, or option rights or appreciation rights with an option price or base price, as applicable, that is less than the option price of the original option rights or base price of the original appreciation rights, as applicable, without shareholder approval. This restriction is intended to prohibit the repricing of “underwater” option rights and appreciation rights and will not be construed to prohibit the adjustments in connection with certain corporate transactions provided for in the Incentive Plan.

In addition, notwithstanding anything in the Incentive Plan to the contrary, up to 10% of the maximum number of shares of common stock that may be issued or transferred under the Incentive Plan, as may be adjusted as described in the Incentive Plan, may be used for (a) restricted shares, restricted stock units, performance shares and units, and other awards that do not comply with the three-year orone-year vesting requirements set forth in the Incentive Plan or (b) common stock awards granted tonon-employee directors.

Transferability. The Compensation Committee may provide for transferability of particular awards under the Incentive Plan, so long as the awards are not transferred in exchange for value or consideration. Otherwise, awards granted under the Incentive Plan will not be transferable by a recipient other than pursuant to a qualified domestic relations order or by will or the laws of descent and distribution. Any award made under the Incentive Plan may provide that any shares of common stock issued or transferred as a result of the award will be subject to further restrictions upon transfer.

Adjustments. The number and kind of shares covered by outstanding option rights, appreciation rights, restricted shares, restricted stock units, deferred shares and performance shares and performance units, and the prices per share applicable thereto, are subject to adjustment in certain situations as provided in the Incentive Plan. In addition, for each option right or appreciation right with an option price or base price greater than the consideration offered in connection with any transaction or event described in the adjustment section of the Incentive Plan or any change in control of the Company, our Compensation Committee may in its sole discretion elect to cancel such option right or appreciation right without any payment to the person holding such option right or appreciation right.

Certain Terminations of Employment and Other Events. If permitted by Section 409A and Section 162(m) of the Code, but subject to the following paragraph, in the event of a termination of employment by reason of death, disability or retirement, or in the event of a change in control of the Company, our Compensation Committee may accelerate the date when an award becomes exercisable or the time at which any substantial risk of forfeiture or prohibition on restriction on transfer or any other restriction period will lapse, or waive or modify any other limitation or requirement with respect to any award under the Incentive Plan. Accordingly, notwithstanding any minimum vesting or performance period specified in the Incentive Plan, awards granted under the Incentive Plan may provide for the earning or vesting of, or earlier elimination of restrictions applicable to, that award by virtue of retirement, death or disability of a grantee or upon a change in control where either (a) the grantee is involuntarily terminated other than for “cause” or terminates his or her employment for “good reason” within a specified period or (b) the award is not assumed or converted into a replacement award as required under the Incentive Plan or the applicable award agreement or other evidence of award.

- 13 -

Subject to the anti-repricing provisions of the Incentive Plan, our Compensation Committee may amend the terms of awards granted under the Incentive Plan prospectively or retroactively, except in the case of an award intended to qualify as “qualified performance-based compensation” under Section 162(m) of the Code (other than in connection with a participant’s death or disability, or a change in control of the Company) where the action would result in the loss of the otherwise available exemption of the award under Section 162(m) of the Code. In that case, our Compensation Committee will not make any modification of the management objectives or the level or levels of achievement with respect to such award. Subject to adjustment as described in the Incentive Plan, no amendment shall impair the rights of any participant without his or her consent.

Definition of “Change in Control”. In general, a change in control will be deemed to have occurred under the Incentive Plan if:

Definition of “Cause”. In general, a participant may be terminated for cause under the Incentive Plan as a result of:

However, a participant may not be terminated for cause unless the participant is given 30 days to cure any acts or omissions giving rise to a termination for cause (other than those acts or omissions described in the first bullet above).

Definition of “Good Reason.”

In general, a participant may terminate his or her employment for good reason under the Incentive Plan if, without the participant’s consent:

- 14 -

However, a participant may not terminate his or her employment for good reason unless (a) the participant gives notice of the Company of the event or condition providing the participant with a right to terminate for good reason within 60 days of the occurrence of the event or condition, (b) the Company does not cure the event or condition within 30 days of receiving the notice and (c) the participant terminates employment within 180 days of the occurrence of such event or condition.

Detrimental Activity and Recapture Provisions. The Incentive Plan provides that awards may be cancelled or forfeited (and gains related to such awards may also be forfeited) either if the recipient is found to be engaging in activities detrimental to the Company, including competition with the Company, unauthorized disclosure of the Company’s confidential or proprietary information or activities resulting in termination for “cause,” or if recapture of such awards (including gains related to such awards) is required under the rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission or the NASDAQ Stock Market.

Amendments and Miscellaneous. The Incentive Plan may be amended by our Board so long as any amendment that would materially increase the benefits accruing to participants under the Incentive Plan, would materially increase the number of securities which may be issued under the Incentive Plan, would materially modify the requirements for participation in the Incentive Plan or must otherwise be approved by the shareholders of the Company in order to comply with applicable law or the rules of the NASDAQ Stock Market is not effective until that approval has been obtained.

Except with respect to option rights and appreciation rights, our Compensation Committee may permit recipients to elect to defer the issuance of shares of common stock or the settlement of awards in cash under procedures set forth by our Compensation Committee and intended to comply with Section 409A of the Code. The Compensation Committee may also provide that deferral settlements include payment or crediting of interest on the deferred amounts or the payment or crediting of dividend equivalents where the deferral amounts are denominated in shares of common stock.

The Incentive Plan and all actions taken pursuant to the Incentive Plan are governed by the laws of the State of Texas.

Federal Income Tax Consequences

The following is a brief summary of certain of the Federal income tax consequences of certain transactions under the Incentive Plan based on Federal income tax laws in effect on January 1, 2017. This summary, which is presented for the information of shareholders considering how to vote on this proposal and not for Incentive Plan participants, is not intended to be complete and does not describe Federal taxes other than income taxes (such as Medicare or Social Security taxes) or state or local tax consequences.

Tax Consequences to Participants.

Restricted Shares. The recipient of shares of restricted common stock generally will be subject to tax at ordinary income rates on the fair market value of the restricted shares (reduced by any amount paid by the recipient for such restricted shares) at such time as the shares are no longer subject to forfeiture or restrictions on transfer for purposes of Section 83 of the Code (“Restrictions”). However, a recipient who so elects under Section 83(b) of the Code within 30 days of the date of transfer of the shares will have taxable ordinary income on the date of transfer of the shares equal to the excess of the fair market value of those shares (determined without regard to the Restrictions) over the purchase price, if any, of the restricted shares. If a Section 83(b) election has not been made, any dividends received with respect to restricted shares that are subject to the Restrictions generally will be treated as compensation that is taxable as ordinary income to the recipient.

- 15 -

Restricted Stock Units. No income generally will be recognized upon the award of restricted stock units. The recipient of a restricted stock unit award generally will be subject to tax at ordinary income rates on the cash received and the fair market value of unrestricted common stock received, as applicable, on the date that the cash or shares are transferred to the recipient under the award (reduced by any amount paid by the participant for those restricted stock units), and the capital gains/loss holding period for any such shares will also commence on such date.

Nonqualified Option Rights. In general, (a) no income will be recognized by an optionee at the time a nonqualified option right is granted, (b) at the time of exercise of a nonqualified option right, ordinary income will be recognized by the optionee in an amount equal to the positive difference, if any, between the option price paid for the shares of common stock and the fair market value of the common stock, if unrestricted, on the date of exercise, and (c) at the time of sale of shares of common stock acquired pursuant to the exercise of a nonqualified option right, appreciation (or depreciation) in value of the shares of common stock after the date of exercise will be treated as either short-term or long-term capital gain (or loss) depending on how long the shares have been held.

Incentive Option Rights. No income generally will be recognized by an optionee upon the grant or exercise of an ISO. The exercise of an ISO, however, may result in alternative minimum tax liability. If shares of common stock are issued to the optionee pursuant to the exercise of an ISO, and if no disqualifying disposition of those shares is made by such optionee within two years after the date of grant or within one year after the transfer of those shares to the optionee, then upon sale of the shares, any amount realized in excess of the option price will be taxed to the optionee as a long-term capital gain and any loss sustained will be a long-term capital loss.

If shares of common stock acquired upon the exercise of an ISO are disposed of prior to the expiration of either holding period described above, the optionee generally will recognize ordinary income in the year of disposition in an amount equal to the excess (if any) of the fair market value of those shares at the time of exercise (or, if less, the amount realized on the disposition of those shares if a sale or exchange) over the option price paid for the shares. Any further gain (or loss) realized by the recipient generally will be taxed as short-term or long-term capital gain (or loss) depending on the holding period.

Appreciation Rights. No income will be recognized by a recipient in connection with the grant of a tandem appreciation right or a freestanding appreciation right. When the appreciation right is exercised, the recipient normally will be required to include as taxable ordinary income in the year of exercise an amount equal to the amount of cash received and the fair market value of any unrestricted shares of common stock received on the exercise.

Cash Incentive Awards, Performance Shares and Performance Units. No income generally will be recognized upon the grant of cash incentive awards, performance shares or performance units. Upon payment in respect of theearn-out of cash incentive awards, performance shares or performance units, the recipient generally will be required to include as taxable ordinary income in the year of receipt an amount equal to the amount of cash received and the fair market value of any nonrestricted shares of common stock received.

Dividend Equivalent Rights. Participants who receive dividend equivalent rights will be required to recognize ordinary income in an amount equal to the amount paid to the participant pursuant to the award.

Unrestricted Stock. Participants who are awarded unrestricted stock will be required to recognize ordinary income in an amount equal to the fair market value of the stock on the date of the award, reduced by the amount, if any, paid for such stock.

Tax Consequences to the Company or a Subsidiary. To the extent that a recipient recognizes ordinary income in the circumstances described above, the Company or a subsidiary for which the recipient performs services will be entitled to a corresponding deduction provided that, among other things, the income meets the

- 16 -

test of reasonableness, is an ordinary and necessary business expense, is not an “excess parachute payment” within the meaning of Section 280G of the Code and is not disallowed by the $1 million annual limitation on certain executive compensation under Section 162(m) of the Code. In this regard, certain types of awards under the Incentive Plan, such as time-vested restricted shares and restricted stock units, cannot qualify as performance-based awards under Section 162(m), and in other cases awards may fail to qualify if all requirements for qualification are not met in connection with such awards.

Plan Benefits

Generally, awards to be granted under the Incentive Plan are discretionary. Therefore, it is not possible to determine the benefits or the amounts to be received in the future under the Incentive Plan by the individuals eligible to participate in the Incentive Plan.

For information regarding the Company’s long-term awards program under the Incentive Plan, see “Compensation Discussion and Analysis-Long Term Incentive Compensation.”For additional information regarding awards made under the Incentive Plan in the year ended December 31, 2016, see “Executive Compensation-Summary Compensation Table” and “Executive Compensation-Grants of Plan-Based Awards.”

- 17 -

PROPOSAL 3

ADVISORY VOTE ON EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

Pursuant to Section 14A of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Exchange Act”), we are submitting the compensation of our named executive officers as disclosed in this proxy statement to our shareholders for an advisory vote. Our Board has adopted a policy to hold annual advisory votes on executive compensation. Our next advisory vote on executive compensation will be at our annual meeting of shareholders in 2017. Our next advisory vote on the frequency of shareholder votes on executive compensation will take place at our annual meeting of shareholders in 2017.

As described below under the heading “Compensation Discussion and Analysis,” we seek to offer our employees, including our named executive officers, with a competitive pay package that rewards individual contributions, performance and experience with our Company, while aligning the interests of our executive officers and other key employees with those of the Company’s shareholders. The Compensation Committee sets compensation in this manner to ensure that our compensation practices do not put the Company at a disadvantage in attracting and retaining executives and other employees, while also ensuring a competitive cost structure for our Company.

The vote on this proposal is not intended to address any specific element of compensation. Rather, the vote relates to the compensation of our named executive officers, as described under the headings “Compensation Discussion and Analysis” and “Executive Compensation” in this proxy statement. The vote is advisory, which means that the vote is not binding on the Company, our Board of Directors or the Compensation Committee. However, the Compensation Committee expects to consider the outcome of this advisory vote in evaluating whether any actions are appropriate with respect to our compensation programs for our executive officers.

The Board recommends a vote “FOR” the approval of the compensation of our named executive officers.

PROPOSAL 34

AMENDMENT OF NON-EMPLOYEE DIRECTORADVISORY VOTE ON FREQUENCY

RESTRICTED STOCK PLANOF AN ADVISORY VOTE ON EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

Background

The AMERISAFE, Inc. Non-Employee Director Restricted Stock Plan, whichIn accordance with the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (and Section 14A of the Exchange Act), we referare submitting the frequency of advisory votes on executive compensation to as the Director Plan, was approved by our Board and shareholders in 2005. There are eight directors currently eligible to participate in the Director Plan. It was amended in 2010 and approved by the Board and shareholders. The Director Plan authorized the issuance of up to 100,000 sharesan advisory vote of our common stock to our non-employee directors. As of April 18, 2016, 25,698 shares were available for issuance under the Director Plan.

Under the existing Director Plan, each non-employee director is automatically granted a restricted stock award for a number of shares of our common stock equal to $30,000 divided by the closing price of our common stock on the date of our annual meeting of shareholders. Each restricted stock award vests on the date of the next annual meeting of shareholders following the date of the grant, subject to the continued service of the non-employee director.

If a non-employee director is elected to the Board other than at an annual meeting of shareholders, the non-employee director receives a pro-rated initial grant of restricted stock based upon the number of full months of service until the next annual meeting of shareholders.

The Compensation Committee has engaged McLagan, an AON Hewitt Company, as its independent compensation consultant. McLagan conducted a director compensation survey in 2014. The director compensation peer group consisted of the same companies that McLagan surveyed in 2014In voting with respect to this Proposal, shareholders may indicate whether they would prefer that we conduct future advisory votes on executive compensation for the Company’s executive officers. For additional information regarding the 2014 executive

compensation peer group, see “Compensation Discussion and Analysis—2014 Survey Peer Group Construction and Survey Results.” The Compensation Committee considered the results of the 2014 director compensation survey and recommended that the Board increase the value of the annual restricted stock award.

Based on the Compensation Committee’s recommendation, the Board approved an amendment to the Director Plan to permit an increase in the dollar value of annual grants to directors to $45,000. Our Board has determined that an advisory vote each year on executive compensation is currently the amendment to the Director Plan is advisable and in the best interests ofappropriate approach for the Company and its shareholders. In making its recommendation, our Board considered that an annual advisory vote on executive compensation allows our shareholders to provide us with timely and has submitteddirect input on the amendment to be votedCompany’s compensation policies, programs and practices. In addition, the Board also considered that a significant majority of shareholders supported an annual advisory vote on by our shareholdersexecutive compensation when this matter was first considered at the Annual Meeting.Company’s annual shareholder meeting in 2011.

Proposed AmendmentOur Board recommends that you vote for an annual advisory vote on executive compensation. This vote is advisory and not binding on the Company or our Board. However, our Board intends to evaluate the voting on this proposal in determining how frequently the Company will submit advisory votes on executive compensation to our shareholders.

If ourThe proxy card provides shareholders with the opportunity to choose among four options (holding the vote every one, two or three years, or abstaining). Shareholders are not voting to approve or disapprove the amendment to the Director Plan, the valuerecommendation of the initial and annual grants of restricted stock to non-employee directors will be increased from $30,000 to $45,000. Further the amendment would permit the Board to increase the dollar amount of the annual award to an amount up to $75,000 without shareholder approval. A copy of the Director Plan, as proposed to be amended, is attached asAppendix A.

Subject to shareholder approval, the Board has awarded each of our current non-employee directors an annual grant of restricted stock with a value of $45,000. If the shareholders do not approve the amendment, each member of the Board will receive common stock with a value of $30,000 in accordance with the existing terms of the Director Plan.

Reasons for the Amendment

We are proposing to increase the value of the initial and annual grants of restricted stock to our non-employee directors to more closely align the total compensation paid to our non-employee directors with market practice at public companies similar to ours and to provide some additional flexibility to adjust the value of these grants in the future. Our Board engaged a compensation consultant to assist in determining a market-competitive amount for the equity component of non-employee director compensation. The current value of the initial and annual grants of restricted stock were established in 2010. The equity component of our non-employee director compensation has not been adjusted since that time.

The Director Plan was first adopted in connection with the Company’s initial public offering in 2005. Since that time, the eight individuals that are currently non-management members of the Board have received, in the aggregate, 61,504 shares of Common Stock as compensation as Board members pursuant to the Plan. As of the date of this proxy statement, these directors continue to hold 57,504 of those shares, or over 93% of the shares received as Board compensation under the Plan. Seven of the eight current non-management directors have never sold any of the shares they have received under the Director Plan. Including the shares granted under the Director Plan, the eight non-management directors beneficially own, in the aggregate, 215,992 shares of Common Stock, representing approximately 0.01% of the outstanding shares beneficially owned by all of the Company’s shareholders.

Eligibility; Administration and Terms

The Director Plan provides for the automatic grant of awards to our non-employee directors. Currently we have eight non-employee directors who are eligible to receive restricted stock awards under the Director Plan.

The Director Plan is administered by the Compensation Committee. Restricted stock awards to non-employee directors are generally subject to terms including non-transferability, immediate vesting upon death or total disability of director, forfeiture of unvested shares upon termination of service by a director, and acceleration of vesting upon a change in control of the Company.Board.

The Board unanimously recommends athat you vote “FOR” the approvaloption of an amendment to the Company’s non-employee

director restricted stock plan.every year.

- 18 -

PROPOSAL 45

RATIFICATION OF APPOINTMENT OF

ERNST & YOUNG LLP AS THE COMPANY’S INDEPENDENT

REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM FOR 20162017

The Audit Committee has appointed Ernst & Young LLP as the Company’s independent registered public accounting firm for 2016.2017. The Board is asking shareholders to ratify this appointment. SEC regulations and the Nasdaq listing requirements require the Company’s independent registered public accounting firm to be engaged, retained and supervised by the Audit Committee. However, the Board considers the selection of an independent registered public accounting firm to be an important matter to shareholders. Accordingly, the Board considers a proposal for shareholders to ratify this appointment to be an opportunity for shareholders to provide input to the Audit Committee and the Board on a key corporate governance issue.

Representatives of Ernst & Young LLP are expected to be present at the Annual Meeting and will be offered the opportunity to make a statement if they so desire. They will also be available to respond to appropriate questions. For additional information regarding our independent registered public accounting firm, see “Independent Public Accountants.”

The Board recommends a vote “FOR” the ratification of Ernst & Young LLP

as the Company’s independent registered public accounting firm.

- 19 -

THE BOARD, ITS COMMITTEES AND ITS COMPENSATION

Board of Directors

The Board presently consists of eightnon-employee directors. directors and one employee director. The Board is divided into three classes, with each class serving three-year terms. The term of one class expires at each annual meeting of shareholders.

Director Compensation

The elements of compensation payable to ournon-employee directors in 20152016 are briefly described below.

Committee Chairs do not receive annual cash retainers for being members of the committees they chair. Meeting fees are not paid for attendance at the first five committee meetings during the year. Any director who is an employee of the Company does not receive additional compensation for serving as a director. Directors do not receive additional compensation for serving on our Risk Committee. The Company reimburses directors for reasonableout-of-pocket expenses incurred in connection with their service as directors.

The amount of restricted stock granted to eachnon-employee director is equal to $30,000$45,000 divided by the closing price of our common stock on the date of the annual meeting of shareholders at which thenon-employee director is elected or continues to be a member of the Board. The shares of restricted stock granted tonon-employee directors vest at the next annual meeting of shareholders. If anon-employee director is first elected or appointed to the Board at a time other than at an annual meeting of shareholders, thenon-employee director is awarded a prorated initial restricted stock grant at that time. Awards tonon-employee directors are made under the AMERISAFE, Inc. 20102016 RestatedNon-Employee Director Restricted Stock Plan (the “2010“2016 Director Plan”).

On June 12, 2015,10, 2016, eachnon-employee director (other than Ms. Fontenot) was granted 1,016697 shares of restricted stock. Ms. Fontenot’s appointment as a director was effective on January 1, 2016. On January 4, 2016 (the first trading day after becoming a director), Ms. Fontenot was granted 376 shares of restricted stock.

For 2016, the Board has revised its director compensation policy. Subject to shareholder approval, the Board will set the annual restricted stock award grant at $45,000. In connection with Mr. Jared Morris being elected Chairman of the Board, the Board plans to approveapproved an annual cash retainer for the Chairman of the Board.Board set at $45,000. Because the Chairman of the Board is independent and separate from the Chief Executive Officer, the Board will no longercurrently does not have a lead independent director. As a result, there will no longer be an annual cash retainer for a lead independent director.

- 20 -

The following table provides information regarding the compensation of ournon-employee directors for the year ended December 31, 2015.2016.

Non-Employee Director Stock Ownership and Retention Guidelines

Our Board recognizes that ownership of common stock is an effective means to align the interests of our directors with those of our shareholders. The following is a summary of our stock ownership and retention guidelines for ournon-employee directors.

Non-Employee Director Stock Ownership Guidelines.Non-employee directors are expected to acquire and hold during their Board service shares of our common stock equal in value to at least three times the annual cash retainer paid to our directors, or $135,000.Non-employee directors have five years from their initial election to the Board to meet these ownership guidelines.

Non-Employee Director Retention Guidelines. Directors are expected to continuously own sufficient shares to meet the guidelines once attained. Until a director meets the ownership guidelines, the director will be required to hold 75% of the shares of common stock received from any equity award, net of any shares used to pay the exercise price or tax withholding. If a director attains compliance with the stock ownership guideline and subsequently falls below the guideline because of a decrease in the price of our common stock, the director will be deemed in compliance provided that the director retains the shares then held.

The following table provides the equity ownership of each of ournon-employee directors as of December 31, 2015,2016, measured in dollars. Ownership was calculated based on a price of $50.90$62.35 per share, the closing price of the Company’s common stock on December 31, 2015.30, 2016, the last trading day of the year.

- 21 -

Corporate Governance

The Board and senior management of the Company believe that one of their primary responsibilities is to promote a corporate culture of accountability, responsibility and ethical conduct throughout the Company. Consistent with these principles, the Company has, among other things, adopted:

In October 2016, the board approved a majority voting and director resignation policy. Under this policy any director nominee who receives a greater number of votes “withheld” or “against” his or her election than votes “for” his or her election is required to tender his or her resignation as a director to the Board promptly following the certification of the election results. This policy does not apply to a “contested” election. A “contested election” is an election in which the number of nominees for director exceeds the number of directors to be elected.

The NCG Committee will consider each resignation tendered under this policy and recommend to the Board whether to accept or reject it. The Board will act on each tendered resignation, taking into account the NCG Committee’s recommendation, within 90 days following the certification of the election results. Any director who tenders his or her resignation pursuant to this policy will not participate in the NCG Committee recommendation or Board deliberations regarding whether to accept or reject the tendered resignation.

Our corporate governance guidelines, code of business conduct and ethics, committee charters and certain other governance policies, including the majority voting policy summarized above, are available on the Company’s website (www.amerisafe.com) in the Investor Relations section. Copies of these documents are also available upon written request to the Company’s Secretary. The Company will post information regarding any amendment to, or waiver from, its code of business conduct and ethics on its website in the Investor Relations section.

Management regularly meets with shareholders and potential investors. In those meetings, investors and shareholders express their views regarding the Company’s executive compensation practices and corporate governance policies. Management reports to the Board and the NCG Committee regarding the discussions at these meetings. The NCG Committee and the Board periodically review the Company’s corporate governance policies and practices. Based on these reviews, input from shareholders and recommendations from the NCG Committee, the Board adopts changes to policies and practices that it believes are in the best interests of the Company, including complying with any new SEC or Nasdaq listing requirements.

The NCG Committee intends to continue to periodically review the Company’s corporate governance policies, taking into consideration, among other things, the views of our shareholders and developments in the governance practices of other public companies.

- 22 -

Board Leadership

On February 25, 2016, Mr. Bradley advised the Board that he would retire as Executive Chairman and as a member of the Board on April 22, 2016. At that time, theThe Board appointed Jared A. Morris as Chairman of the Board effective as of Mr. Bradley’s retirement.in April 2016. The Board believes that separating the roles of Chairman and Chief Executive Officer is the most effective leadership structure for the Company at this time.

As Chairman, Mr. J. Morris’s key responsibilities include:

Director Independence

As part of the Company’s corporate governance guidelines, the Board has established a policy requiring a majority of the members of the Board to be independent, as that term is defined in the Nasdaq listing requirements. The Board has determined that each of itsnon-employee directors, Mr. Brown, Ms. Fontenot, Mr. Garcia, Mr. J. Morris, Mr. M. Morris, Mr. Phillips, Mr. Roach, and Mr. Young, is independent of the Company and its management within the meaning of the Nasdaq listing requirements.

In determining that Mr. Phillips is independent, the Board considered that Mr. Phillips is President, Chief Executive Officer and an owner of PAX, Inc.,LLC, a policyholder of the Company. The Board determined that this relationship does not interfere with Mr. Phillips’ exercise of independent judgment and that he is independent within the meaning of the Nasdaq listing requirements. See “Certain Relationships and Related Transactions.”

Board Meetings

The Board held sixfive meetings during 2015.2016. Each director serving on the Board in 20152016 attended at least 75% of the total number of meetings of the Board and committees on which he or she served. Under the Company’s corporate governance guidelines, each director is expected to devote the time necessary to appropriately discharge his or her responsibilities and to rigorously prepare for, attend and participate in all Board meetings and meetings of Board committees on which he or she serves.

Annual Meetings of Shareholders

The Company’s directors are encouraged to attend our annual shareholder meetings, but we do not currently have a policy relating to directors’ attendance at these meetings. SixFive directors, Mr. Bradley, Mr. J. Morris, Mr. M. Morris,Ms. Fontenot, Mr. Garcia, Mr. RoachMs. Frost and Mr. Phillips,Young, attended our 20152016 annual meeting of shareholders, either in person or by teleconference.

- 23 -

Audit Committee

The Audit Committee currently consists of Mr. Garcia (Chair), Mr. Brown, Ms. Fontenot, Mr. J. Morris Mr. Young and Ms. Fontenot. In April 2016, Mr. Garcia was appointed Committee chair, succeeding Mr. Young. The Audit Committee oversees our accounting and financial reporting processes and the audits of the Company’s financial statements. The functions and responsibilities of the Audit Committee include:

The Audit Committee met sixfive times during 2015.2016. Our independent registered public accounting firm reports directly to the Audit Committee. Each member of the Audit Committee has the ability to read and understand fundamental financial statements. The Board has determined that each member of the Audit Committee is “independent” as defined in the Nasdaq listing requirements and SEC requirements relating to the independence of audit committee members. The Board has also determined that Ms. Fontenot, Mr. YoungGarcia and Mr. GarciaYoung each meet the requirements of an “audit committee financial expert” as defined by SEC rules. The Audit Committee has the authority to engage independent counsel and other advisors as the Committee deems necessary to carry out its duties.

- 24 -

Compensation Committee

The Compensation Committee currently consists of Mr. Brown (Chair), Mr. Garcia, Mr. J. Morris and Mr. Roach. In April 2016, Mr. Brown was appointed Committee chair, succeeding Mr. Garcia. The Compensation Committee has sole authority for establishing, administering and reviewing the Company’s policies, programs and procedures for compensating our executive officers and the members of the Board. The Compensation Committee may delegate its responsibilities to a subcommittee comprised of Compensation Committee members. The functions and responsibilities of the Compensation Committee include:

The Compensation Committee met sevensix times during 2015.2016. The Board has determined that each member of the Compensation Committee is independent under the Nasdaq listing requirements.

The Compensation Committee has the sole authority to retain and terminate compensation consultants to assist in the evaluation of director or executive officer compensation and the sole authority to approve the fees and other retention terms of such compensation consultants. The committee may also retain independent counsel and other independent advisors to assist it in carrying out its responsibilities.

Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee

The NCG Committee currently consists of Mr. Roach (Chair), Ms. Fontenot, Mr. J. Morris, (Chair), Mr. Phillips, Mr. Roach and Mr. Young. The functions and responsibilities of the NCG Committee include:

- 25 -

The NCG Committee met four times during 2015.2016. The Board has determined that each member of the NCG Committee is independent under the Nasdaq listing requirements.

The NCG Committee has the sole authority to retain and terminate any search firm to assist in the identification of director candidates and the sole authority to set the fees and other retention terms of such search firms. The committee may also retain independent counsel and other independent advisors to assist it in carrying out its responsibilities.

Qualifications for Director Nominees. In considering director nominees, the NCG Committee considers a number of factors, including the following:

The NCG Committee will also consider other criteria for director candidates included in its committee charter, the Company’s corporate governance guidelines or as may be established from time to time by the Board. The NCG Committee has not adopted a separate policy pertaining to the consideration of diversity in the selection of nominees to the Board. The NCG Committee will identify nominees based upon recommendations by committee members or other Board members, members of the Company’s management or, as discussed below, by shareholders of the Company. Upon identifying a potential nominee, members of the NCG Committee will interview the candidate, and based upon that interview, make a recommendation to the Board.

Shareholder Recommendations. The NCG Committee will evaluate director candidates recommended by a shareholder according to the same criteria as a candidate identified by the NCG Committee. To date, the Company has not received a recommendation for a director candidate from our shareholders.

- 26 -

Shareholders may recommend candidates at any time, but to be considered by the NCG Committee for inclusion in the Company’s proxy statement for the next annual meeting of shareholders, recommendations must be submitted in writing no later than 150 calendar days before the first anniversary of the date on which the Company first mailed its proxy materials for the prior year’s annual meeting of shareholders. A shareholder’s notice must contain the following:

The shareholder’s notice must be signed by the shareholder recommending the director candidate for consideration and sent to the following address: AMERISAFE, Inc., 2301 Highway 190 West, DeRidder, Louisiana 70634, Attn: Corporate Secretary (Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee Communication/Director Candidate Recommendation).

Succession Planning

Our Board considers the evaluation of management and succession planning to be one of its most important responsibilities. The Board’s goal is to have a long-term program for effective senior leadership and development, with appropriate contingencies in case our chief executive officer, or any of our other executive officers, retires, resigns or is incapacitated.

In the Board’s succession planning program, internal candidates for the executive positions, including the chief executive officer, are identified and evaluated based on criteria considered predictive of success at the senior management level. This program incorporates 360 reviews and related evaluations for each individual. The assessment includes a development plan, including executive coaching, for each individual.

Our Corporate Governance Guidelines provides that the NCG Committee report to the Board on succession planning at least annually. The chief executive officer is responsible for advising the Board regarding her recommendations and evaluations of potential successors, together with a review of any development plans for these individuals. The Board, with the assistance of the NCG Committee, evaluates potential successors to the CEO, as well as other members of senior management.

Risk Committee

The Board views risk management as one of its primary responsibilities. The Board initially formed the Risk Committee in 2010 to facilitate its risk management functions. In August 2011, the Board dissolved the Investment Committee and delegated the oversight responsibilities previously performed by the Investment Committee to the Risk Committee.

The Risk Committee’s charter provides that all members of the Board are members of the Risk Committee. Mr. M. Morris serves as chair of the Risk Committee and establishes the agenda for the meetings. Risk Committee members periodically receive presentations on risk-related topics from the Company’s management.

The Risk Committee’s responsibilities include:

The Risk Committee met four times in 2015.2016. The Risk Committee has the authority to select, retain, terminate, and approve the fees and other terms of retention of special counsel, experts and consultants. This Committee also has direct access to any Company employee.

- 27 -

Risk Management

In addition to the activities of the Risk Committee, the Board monitors risks arising from financial reporting and controls through its Audit Committee and risks related to compensation through its Compensation Committee.

Succession Planning

Our Board considers the evaluation of management and succession planning to be one of its most important responsibilities. The Board’s goal is to have a long-term program for effective senior leadership and development, with appropriate contingencies in case our chief executive officer, or any of our other executive officers, retires, resigns or is incapacitated.

In the Board’s succession planning program, internal candidates for the executive positions, including the chief executive officer, are identified and evaluated based on criteria considered predictive of success at the senior management level. This program incorporates 360 reviews and related evaluations for each individual. The assessment includes a development plan, including executive coaching, for each individual.

Our Corporate Governance Guidelines provides that the NCG Committee report to the Board on succession planning at least annually. The chief executive officer is responsible for advising the Board regarding her recommendations and evaluations of potential successors, together with a review of any development plans for these individuals. The Board, with the assistance of the NCG Committee, evaluates potential successors to the CEO, as well as other members of senior management.

Communications with the Board

Any shareholder or other interested party who wishes to communicate directly with the Board or any of its members may do so by writing to: Board of Directors, c/o AMERISAFE, Inc., 2301 Highway 190 West, DeRidder, Louisiana 70634, Attn: Corporate Secretary. The mailing envelope should clearly indicate whether the communication is intended for the Board as a group, thenon-employee directors or a specific director.

- 28 -

COMPENSATION DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS

This Compensation Discussion and Analysis, or CD&A, is designed to provide shareholders with an understanding of the Company’s compensation philosophy and objectives, as well as the analysis that the Compensation Committee (referred to in this CD&A as the “Committee”) performed in setting executive compensation. It discusses the determination of how and why, in addition to what, compensation actions were taken during 20152016 by the Committee for the two individualsindividual that served as our chief executive officer, the two individualsindividual that served as our chief financial officer, and our only two other three executive officers during 20152016 (which are referred to in this CD&A as our “named executive officers”):

In March 2016, Ms. Shirley was promoted to Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer

In March 2015,in that capacity became an executive officer of the Company announced thatCompany. Mr. Bradley would retire from the Company and that Ms. Frost would assume the role of Chief Executive Officer of the Company effective April 1, 2015, succeeding Mr. Bradley. Mr. Bradley remainedwas an executive officer of the Company as Executive Chairman until his retirement on April 22, 2016. In his role as chief executive officer, in February 2015, Mr. Bradley made recommendations to the Committee on base pay compensation for each of the named executive officers, other than changes in his compensation.

In May 2015, Mr. Grasher resigned as Chief Financial Officer. Mr. Fuller was appointed Chief Financial Officer in September 2015.

Executive Summary

Recent Company Performance Highlights

We are a holding company that markets and underwrites workers’ compensation insurance through our insurance subsidiaries. The Company had strong operating performance during fiscal year 2015,2016, as demonstrated by the following highlights:

In 2015,2016, the Company paid regular quarterly dividends of $0.60$0.72 per share and an extraordinary dividend of $3.00$3.25 per share. Effective March 2016,February 2017, the Board of Directors increased the regular quarterly dividend from $0.15$0.18 per share to $0.18$0.20 per share, an increase of 20%11.1%.

Compensation Best Practices

Over the last several years, the Committee has reviewed and modified our executive compensation program in order to not only remain competitive with our peers so we can retain and attract top executive talent to the

Company but also toand ensure that our program is aligned with the interests of our shareholders and meets evolving governance standardsstandards. The following highlights some of the compensation and governance best practices that are part of our program:

- 29 -

Compensation Program Objectives

Our compensation program is intended to attract, retain and motivate the key people necessary to enable our Company to operate effectively and profitably over the long-term. The Committee believes that executive compensation should align the interests of the Company’s executives and other key employees with those of the Company and its shareholders. Our compensation program is also designed to differentiate compensation based upon individual contribution, performance and experience with our Company.

In establishing compensation, the Committee seeks to provide employees, including our executive officers, with a competitive total compensation package. The Committee sets compensation in this manner to ensure that our compensation practices do not put the Company at a disadvantage in attracting and retaining executives and other employees, while also ensuring a competitive cost structure for our Company.

Compensation CommitteeProcesses

Our compensation program for executives is designed and implemented under the direction of the Committee, which is currently comprised of the following four independent directors: Mr. Brown (chair),

- 30 -

Mr. Garcia, Mr. J. Morris and Mr. Roach. In April 2016, Mr. Brown was appointed Committee chair, succeeding Mr. Garcia. For additional information regarding our Committee and its authority and responsibilities, see “The Board, Its Committees, and Its Compensation—Compensation Committee.”

20152016 Advisory Vote on Executive Compensation

At our annual meeting of shareholders in June 2015,2016, more than 99%98% of the votes cast in thesay-on-pay proposal were in support of our executive compensation program. The Committee considered the results of this advisory vote and believes the results affirm shareholder approval of the Board’s approach to the Company’s executive compensation program. Accordingly,Although the Committee did not adopt any changes to thisour program as a result of this vote. However,vote, as noted above the Committee is continually evaluating our executive compensation and has made changes in the past few years to strengthen the performance elements of the program and further align the program with our shareholders’ interests.

Role of Compensation Consultant

Since early 2012, the Committee has engaged McLagan, an AON Hewitt Company, as its independent compensation consultant. Since its engagement,Most recently, McLagan has conducted three executive compensation surveys the “2012during 2015 and 2016. The “2015 Survey,” the “2014 Survey,” and the “2015 Survey.” The 2014 Survey, reviewed by the Committee in the fall of 2014,2015, was used in setting compensation for 2015. The Committee presently intends to conduct executive compensation surveys annually to ensure our executive compensation program is competitive in retaining and attracting executive talent.2016. The Committee is solely responsible for the appointment, compensation and oversight of the compensation consultant.

Pursuant to Company policy, McLagan provides nodoes not provide services to the Company other than consulting services to the Committee. AON, the parent company of McLagan, did providereceived $25,000 for insurance brokerage services tofrom the Company during 2015 and earned less than $25,000 in insurance brokerage2016. Those fees from the Company, that arewere unrelated to McLagan’s compensation committee advisory fees in 2015.2016.

McLagan attends Committee meetings, when necessary, and in connection with the executive compensation surveys, advises on matters including peer group composition, pay levels and pay composition, and annual and long-term incentive plan design. McLagan also provides market data, analysis, and advice regarding the CEO and executive officer compensation to the Committee as well as director compensation surveys and advice. As required by SEC rules, the Committee assessed the independence of McLagan and concluded that McLagan’s work did not raise any conflicts of interest.

2015 Survey—Peer Group Construction and Survey Results

The 2015 Survey compared the compensation for our executive officers against a peer group of 10 publicly traded insurance companies. The 2015 Survey also included a review of the Company’s annual and long-term incentive compensation plan design. McLagan used Company and peer group compensation data for 2014 in its preparation of the 2015 Survey. The Committee reviewed the 2015 Survey results in assessing the level of salary and bonuses paid to our executives and approving changes to the compensation levels and annual and long-term compensation plans for our executive officers in 2016.

In 2014, the Committee used a rigorous process to select peer companies for benchmarking executive pay which included ranking by premiums written, complexity scoring based on number of employees, lines of insurance business, multi-line versus mono-line property-casualty insurer, number of states doing business in, and investment mix. Potential peer companies that were not primarily in the property casualty insurance business were excluded from the list, as the Committee believed that the Company would not likely recruit executives from those companies. Twenty-three potential peer companies were identified, consisting of peers used in prior compensation surveys used by the Company, peer companies selected by ISS from its 2013 analysis of the Company, and peer companies suggested by McLagan. With the assistance of McLagan, the Company selected 11 publicly traded insurers from the list of 23 potential peer companies. The Committee reviewed this list of peer companies again in 2015 and made no changes to the peer group, although prior to McLagan’s preparation of the 2015 survey one company was removed from the peer group as it was no longer publicly traded.

- 31 -

The 10 publicly traded companies used by McLagan in the 2015 Study were the following, all of which had been included in the peer group for the prior survey conducted by McLagan.

In addition to compensation data specifically relating to the 10 companies named above, McLagan also used market compensation data from published survey sources relating to companies in the insurance and financial services industry in developing the recommendations contained in the 2015 survey.

The results of the 2015 Survey indicated that the Company’s aggregate executive officer compensation was below the market median for each pay element. Total compensation for 2016 for each of our named executive officers ranged from 42% to 64% of the market median.

Role of Management

At the request of the Committee, in February 2016, our chief executive officer, Ms. Frost, made recommendations with respect to changes in base salary for our executive officers for 2016. With respect to the 2016 annual incentive compensation plan, Ms. Frost made recommendations regarding the level of achievement of individual performance goals by each executive officer other than herself. Although the Committee considered the recommendations of Ms. Frost, the Committee makes all final determinations regarding executive compensation.

Risk Assessment

The Committee annually considers the risk to the Company of the design and objectives of its executive compensation plans. The primary risk is weighting the premium growth factor too heavily in the annual and long-term incentive plans. Premium growth at too fast a rate could result in poor underwriting results and ultimately affect the financial strength of the company. The Committee believes the current weighting of the metrics in the annual and long-term incentive plans are appropriately balanced with the other metrics in those plans.

- 32 -

2014 Survey Peer Group Construction and Survey Results

The 2014 Survey compared the compensation for our executive officers against a peer group of 11 publicly traded insurance companies. The 2014 Survey also included a review of the Company’s annual and long-term incentive compensation plan design. McLagan used Company and peer group compensation data for 2013 in its preparation of the 2014 Survey. The Committee utilized the 2014 Survey results in assessing the level of salary and bonuses paid to our executives and approving changes to the compensation levels and annual and long-term compensation plans for our executive officers in 2015.

The 11 companies in the 2014 Survey were all publicly traded companies in the insurance industry. The Committee used a rigorous process to select peer companies for benchmarking executive pay. With the assistance of McLagan, the Company selected 11 publicly traded insurers from a list of 23 potential peer companies. The 23 potential peer companies consisted of peers in the prior survey used by the Company, peer companies selected by ISS from its 2013 analysis of the Company, and peer companies suggested by McLagan.

The potential peer companies were then ranked by premiums written, as the Committee believed that was a key indicator of the size of an insurer. The Committee selected peer size criteria of 0.4 times to 2.5 times Amerisafe’s 2013 premiums written as appropriate peers. Potential peer companies that were not primarily in the property casualty insurance business were excluded from the list, as the Committee believed that the Company would not likely recruit executives from those companies.

The Committee then developed a complexity score for each of the remaining potential peer companies. Factors used in developing the complexity score were: number of employees, lines of insurance business, multi-line versus mono-line property-casualty insurer, number of states doing business in, and investment mix. As a result of this scoring a complexity score was produced for each company. The Committee analyzed the complexity scores of each company and compared the score to the AMERISAFE complexity score. Several potential peer companies were excluded for high or low complexity scores when compared to AMERISAFE.

As a result of this analysis, the committee selected the following 11 companies for the executive pay benchmark study to be completed by McLagan, eight of which were included in the peer group for the prior survey.

In addition to compensation data specifically relating to the 11 companies named above, McLagan also used market compensation data from published survey sources relating to companies in the insurance and financial services industry in developing the recommendations contained in the 2014 survey.

The table below summarizes the results of the 2014 Survey, using the 2013 base salary, total cash compensation and total compensation for each of our named executive officers based on their positions at the time as a percentage of the 50^th percentile of the peer company compensation. It also shows how these compensation elements for 2015 compare to the 2014 Survey results, although these comparisons will reflect a more competitive Company pay position than is actually the case today. The 2015 compensation elements for Mr. Bradley and Ms. Frost are reflected at their compensation levels after April 1, 2015, when Mr. Bradley

assumed the role of executive chairman and Ms. Frost became chief executive officer. The results of the 2014 Survey show that the Company’s 2015 total compensation levels are below the market median for the named executive officers.

that showed that these target award levels were competitive to the median of the peer group at the time. When setting the target awards for Mr. Bradley and Ms. Frost, the Committee considered Mr. Bradley’s announced intention to retire and Ms. Frost’s assumption of the chief executive officer duties and responsibilities beginning in April 2015. The Committee believed the target levels were appropriate given that base salary levels were all lower than the peer median.

For 2015,2016, the Committee established Company performance goals under the following metrics: GAAP loss ratio (“LR”), GAAP expense ratio (“ER”), GAAP gross premiums written (“GPW”) and GAAP return on average equity (“ROE”). The Company performance goals are the same for each of our executive officers, however the goals were weighted differently for each executive officer based on the Committee’s assessment of each executive’s ability to influence the outcome of the particular objective. The Committee also established individual performance goals for each executive officer, including our chief executive officer. The individual performance goals established were principally qualitative rather than quantitative. The weighting of the individual performance goals for our chief executive officer, Ms. Frost, are lower because the Committee believes that her performance should be evaluated primarily on the outcome of Company quantitative metrics. The Committee believes that this approach appropriately incentivizes the chief executive officer to focus her efforts on the financial performance of the Company.

The following table sets forth the target award opportunity for each named executive officer and the corresponding target percentage of base salary represented by each Company performance goal and the individual performance goals for 2015.2016.

The following table sets forth the performance goals established under the Company metrics for the 20152016 annual incentive compensation plan and the results achieved.

For each Company performance metric, no amount is earned if the threshold performance goal is not achieved. If the threshold is achieved, the executive officers are eligible to earn from 50% to 150% of the portion of the target bonus tied to that metric, with the award for that metric determined by the amount by which the Company exceeded the threshold performance.

- 35 -

As with the Company performance metrics, each named executive officer could earn between 0% and 150% of the target individual goals based on the level of achievement of the applicable goals. The committee determined the achievement levels of individual performance goals under the 20152016 annual incentive plan for all executive officers, considering the recommendations of Mr. Bradley and Ms. Frost for the executives other than themselves.herself. The Committee awarded Mr. Bradley and Ms. Frost, the maximum award of 150% for theirher individual performance awardsaward in 2015.2016. In determining their awards,her award, the Committee considered the extraordinary financial results of the Company for 20152016 and the smooth transition to a new executive management team for the Company.

At its meeting in February 2016,2017, the Committee approved annual incentive award payouts for our named executive officers related to the Company performance goals as follows:

The total annual incentive award payouts for our named executive officers for 20152016 were as follows:

Long-Term Incentive Compensation. TheUnder our current program, the Committee intends to makemakes LTIP awards on an annual basis, but may adjust the performance factors, the weighting of those factors, the mix of performance-based and time-based awards and other aspects of the LTIP each year as it evaluates the effectiveness of the program over time. The following beliefs and objectives guide the Committee in implementing our LTIP each year:

Under the LTIP, target awards are established annually for each executive officer based on a percentage of the executive’s base salary. TheIn 2016, the target award is made through one or bothvalue was delivered to each executive in the form of the following types of awards: a performance-based award and a time-based award, although(representing a majority of the total LTIP value awarded to each executive is delivered in the form of thevalue) and a time-based award. The performance-based award . The performance-based award(the “performance award”) is payable in shares of common stock, with the number of shares earned determined based on the Company achievement of certain quantitative targets measured over a three-year

- 36 -

performance period. The time-based award is represented by restricted stock that vests on the third anniversary of the grant date, conditioned on continued employment with the Company. Awards under the LTIP are made pursuant to our shareholder-approved 2012 Equity and Incentive Compensation Plan.

For 2015, all of our executive officers, except Mr. Bradley, received both a performance-based award (representing 55% of the total target value) and a time-based award (representing 45% of the total target value). Because Mr. Bradley, our Executive Chairman, received a significant stock option award in our IPO in 2005, his LTIP awards have been comprised solely of performance-based awards. The Committee believes that use of time-based restricted stock with three-year cliff vesting serves an important retention function for newer executives, and also provides an immediate alignment with shareholder interests.interests for all executives.

The 20142015 Survey reaffirmed the importance of the LTIP in making the Company’s executive compensation program competitive with peers. McLagan also reviewed the design of the LTIP and advised the Committee that the plan design provided appropriate performance and retention incentives for executive management. Awards under the LTIP are made pursuant to our shareholder-approved 2012 Equity and Incentive Compensation Plan.

20152016 Long-Term Incentive Compensation Awards. In 2015,.In 2016, the Committee set an aggregate target value, which was a percentage of salary, for the 20152016 LTIP awards for each named executive officer at an amount generally below the market median for the long-term compensation component of pay as shown in the 20142015 Survey.

The following table sets forth the Except for Mr. Bradley, this aggregate target value was then awarded to each executive in the form of a performance award (representing 55% of the performance-based awardsaggregate target value) and thea restricted stock awards that were approved byaward (representing 45% of the Committee under the 2015 LTIP.aggregate target value), as set forth below:

- 37 -

Description of 2015 Performance-Based Awards2016 Performance Awards..The performance-basedperformance awards provide a target dollar amount that may be earned by the executive, which amount will be paid in shares of our common stock, subject to certain limited exceptions. The amount earned under the performance-basedperformance award maywill be less than or greater than the target value set in the award. However, in no event may an executive receive more thanbetween 0% and 150% of the award’s target value under this performance-based award.value. The actual amount earned, if any, that an executive will earn under the performance-based award is dependent on the Company’s operating performance over a three-year period beginning on January 1, 20152016 and ending December 31, 2017,2018, relative to the performance of a designated peer group of insurance companies selected by the Committee. In 2015,2016, the Committee reviewed the peer group selected for the performance awards in 20142015 and confirmed that the companies selected continued to be significant competitors of the Company in the workers’ compensation markets in which it operates. This group differs from the peer group used in the 2014 survey, which is made up of publicly-traded insurance companies for use in benchmarking executive pay levels. The following 22 companies selected ascomprise the performance peer group for the 2015 performance-based2016 performance awards under the LTIP were:LTIP:

•   Builders Mutual Insurance Company		•   National Interstate Corporation
•   Cincinnati Financial Corporation		•   Sentry Insurance
•   Donegal Insurance Group		•   West Bend Mutual Insurance Company

The Committee selected threetwo metrics to measure the Company’s operating performance under the 20152016 performance-based awards: combined ratio (“CR”), and direct premiums written (“DPW”), and total return on invested assets (“TROIA”), each determined on the basis of statutory accounting principles used by insurance companies (including the Company) in filings made with state regulatory authorities. Direct premiums written are our gross premiums written minus assumed premiums written (for mandatory pooling arrangements). Combined ratio is a standard industry profitability measure and is calculated as the sum of: 1) incurred losses divided by net premiums earned; 2) underwriting expenses divided by net premiums written; and 3) dividends to policyholders divided by net premiums earned. The Committee selected these measures as they were deemed to be significant benchmarks to the successful performance of the Company.

Relative Weighting of Performance Measures for each Executive.Executive.The relative weighting for each of the performance measures wasis evaluated annually based on market factors and determined by the Committee in consultation with the then current chief executive officer, Mr. Bradley, and differ for each executive based on the primary responsibilities of the executive.Committee. The following table showsbelow represents the relative weighting for each executive officer for eachthe 2016 performance measure applicableawards to the 2015 performance-based awards:executives:

- 38 -

Calculation of Earned Amounts under the Performance Awards. Following the end of the applicable performance period, the Committee will determine the percentage of the target award earned (the “Earned Value”) as follows:

Step 1: Application of Threshold Basis Points used inConcept to Calculation of Awards.In designing the performance-based award under the LTIP, the Committee recognized that the Company had demonstrated outstanding operating performance and consistently outperformed the workers’ compensation industry, including the peer companies listed above. As a consequence, the Committee’s award design considered this historical performance when determining the level of performance that would result in maximum payout under the performance-based awards. The Committee incorporated into the calculation of the award the concept of threshold basis points (“TBP”). into the calculation of the Earned Value. TBP is the amount by which the Company’s performance for each measure must exceed the results of the performance peer group for the payout of that measure to equal two times the target level. Thelevel (as noted above, the overall award is limited to 150 percent150% of the target compensation.award value). TBP is expressed in basis points (“BP”). The first step in the calculation of the awardEarned Value is to compare the 2015 performance of the Company over the performance period to that of the 22 companies in the peer group for the three measures (CR, DPW, TROIA)applicable performance and to determine whether the TBP level for each measure has been achieved. TheFor example, the TBP for each measure in 2015the 2016 performance awards were as follows:

Step 2: Reduction Based on Total Shareholder Return.Following a determination of the payout level based on the metrics described above, the payout is then reduced if the total shareholder return (“TSR”) of the Company is more than 500 basis points lower than the total shareholder return of the average of 50% of the S&P Property Casualty Insurance Small Cap Index and 50% of the S&P Property & Casualty Insurance Mid Cap Index over the three-year period. The TSR measure cannot increase payouts under the awards, but is only used to reduce the payout when the Company TSR lags the index by more than 500 basis points. The TSR measure operates as a fourththird metric in the award design and reduces the payout factor 37.5 points for every 500 BP of underperformance. The Committee believes this negative weighting aligns the interests of shareholders with that of our executive officers.

PaymentsStep 3: Conversion of Earned Value to Shares of Common Stock.After determination of the Earned Value under each performance-basedperformance award, will bepayment is made in shares of common stock (rounded to the nearest whole share) equal to (a) the amount earnedEarned Value under the award divided by (b) the volume weighted trading price per share of

- 39 -

common stock for the 10 trading days immediately preceding the date the value of the award is approved by the Committee.

2012 – 2014 Payout of the 2013 – 2015 Performance Based Awards.The following table sets forth the performance measures established under the Company’s 2012performance awards for the 2013 – 2014 Long Term Incentive2015 performance planperiod, and the results achieved. The 2012-2014 LTIP bonus was distributedshares of common stock earned under this award were issued to Company executivesthe award recipients in May 2015.2016.