Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

In this Discussion

Here's a statement of the obvious: The opinions expressed here are those of the participants, not those of the Mutual Fund Observer. We cannot vouch for the accuracy or appropriateness of any of it, though we do encourage civility and good humor.

    Support MFO

  • Donate through PayPal

3 Big Dividends The IRS Can't Touch

https://www.forbes.com/sites/michaelfoster/2019/06/01/3-big-dividends-the-irs-cant-touch/#14b8a0d2eb85

What if I told you I’d found a way to protect your portfolio from this twitchy market without giving up big gains (and income)?

My guess is you’d be interested—if a little skeptical.


VMO
Mub
Nim
Pml
Nad
mca

Comments

  • msf
    edited June 2019
    of the 171 muni-bond CEFs tracked by my CEF Insider service [WARNING: product placement], 141 are beating the index for 2019. In other words, over 82% of the actively managed municipal-bond funds are crushing the "dumb” index fund.

    You might wonder how this is possible. ...

    The answer: ...

    Because muni bonds aren’t traded as frequently as stocks, and because average investors don’t have the same access as big players, the muni-bond market has a ton of inefficiencies money managers can—and do—jump on.
    Or ... it might just be that these funds are highly leveraged (a word that doesn't appear anywhere in the column), and that bond yields have been dropping precipitously this year.

    That means that bonds have been appreciating; something that is magnified by leverage. The same leverage that puts these funds at risk when yields (and prices) reverse direction.

    Nor is there any discussion of relative discounts, i.e. how much of a discount these funds are selling at vs. their normal discount. Viewing these funds' discount percentages over time, it looks like the magnitude of discount has increased almost linearly from the middle of 2016 to the end of 2018. Though it has receded a bit this year. They are trading at larger than average discounts; this results in somewhat inflated yields for the moment.

    People here probably know I'm not a fan of leverage, so keep that in mind in reading my comments. If you're comfortable with around 40% leverage, fine, go for it. But don't go for the numbers without checking what's behind the curtains.
  • Thanks @msf , for the dissection of the write.
  • My experience has usually been the opposite. If the IRS wants it they'll get it.
  • CURTAINS??
    In financial stuff??

    Who knew?? :(
  • VMO also pays a 5% tax-free dividend, which is equivalent to an 8% yield for some taxpayers.

  • Yup - decent fund. Though at 40% leverage, not sure how comfy I'd be throwing $$$ into it ... although I didn't own many leveraged products myself, the GFC was an eye-opener in that respect, at least for me, and I try to keep leverage in my CEF holdings to under 25%.

    VMO also pays a 5% tax-free dividend, which is equivalent to an 8% yield for some taxpayers.

  • Minor point, but the headline is incorrect. 10.5% of last year's income from VMO was subject to AMT - the IRS can touch it.

    Click on the second to last item under Income breakdown:
    Federal Alternative Minimum Tax - National Funds
    https://www.invesco.com/portal/site/us/investors/closed-end-tax-guide/#tab_tab2
  • @msf: If one doesn't make enough for AMT to take effect would this still hold, & believe this also depends on which state you live in .
    Have a nice weekend, Derf
  • @Derf - Does Your State Have an Individual Alternative Minimum Tax?

    See Here:
  • @Mark: (Wisconsin adopted AMT repeal in 2017, effective starting in tax year 2019.)
    Derf
  • msf
    edited June 2019
    If the headline, "dividends the IRS can't touch" means that for some taxpayers the IRS can't tax the dividends, we can say the same thing about lots of funds.

    For example, VFIAX (Vangard 500) pays dividends the IRS can't touch "if one doesn't make enough". For taxpayers (roughly) below the 22% tax bracket, the IRS can't touch qualified dividends. Lower threshold, but same idea.

    Either a fund's dividends are beyond the IRS' reach regardless of who receives them, or they are not. As an investor, I can't blindly buy these funds confident that the IRS cannot touch their dividends. Despite what the headline says. This is especially important since the article is making a big deal about how much the taxable equivalent would be for taxpayers in the highest tax bracket.


    States with AMT (though I don't see how that affects whether the IRS could touch the funds' dividends):

    image

  • January 11 Flag (2015)
    Basically correct. To the extent that your taxable income remains within the 15% tax bracket, your cap gains/qualified divs gets taxed at 0%.

    In 2014, if a couple had $94,100 in AGI (all cap gains/qualified divs), then line 38 (AGI on p. 2) would be $94,100. Subtracting a standard deduction of $12,400 gets us down to $81,700. Subtracting two exemptions ($3,950 each), gets us to a taxable income of $73,800.

    Taxable income under $73,800 is taxed at 15% (or less). So if that's your total income, the cap gains/qualified div portion of it is taxed at 0%.

    I guess the rate went up just a little ,50% increase ?
    Derf
Sign In or Register to comment.