LCB PRBLX's oft-forgotten sister, LCV PARWX is NTF at Fido and the leader of the LCV pack of NTF and/or TF funds over most periods. Have owned the latter since late 2020/early 2021.

Historically, tax changes have been retroactive. They have been effective the year in which they were passed. The only recent exception was the 2017 Tax Cut and Jobs Act, but that became law on Dec 22, 2017.
It's not as though people who might be affected couldn't have already planned for it:

In light of the U.S. presidential election on 3 November 2020, many investors and business owners expecting a liquidity event are focused on the possibility that the current capital gains rate (generally, 23.8 percent) could be subject to significant change, including potentially taxing long-term capital gains at higher ordinary income rates for certain filers. While overarching considerations weigh heavily in the context of voting decisions and private business sales alike, history suggests that, faced with the prospect of a potentially changing federal income tax rate, waiting to see legislative change might foreclose opportunities to realize gains at current favorable rates.
...because tax legislation enacted at any time in 2021 could potentially apply to all transactions occurring in 2021, investors and business owners expecting a liquidity event should consider completing their intended transactions on or before 31 December 2020 if they would like more assurance that they will benefit from the current long-term capital gains rate.

National Law Review, Oct 22, 2020.
https://www.natlawreview.com/article/capital-gains-rate-historical-perspectives-retroactive-changes

Tom Madell article:

-Vanguard index mutual funds and comparable Vanguard ETFs are merely different classes of the exact same fund. Their returns are virtually identical while they have had no capital gain distributions over the last five years. Therefore, there is no particular performance superiority of one over the other.
-An ETF will not always outperform a nearly matched mutual fund. Some ETFs can still sport higher expense ratios than comparable mutual funds. And managed, as opposed to indexed mutual funds, can tilt their portfolios as to sometimes achieve a better return than an ETF which adheres strictly to its benchmark index.
-Mutual funds with a load are typically, but not always, going to show lower fee-adjusted long-term performance than a comparable ETF or mutual fund without a load, although that difference can disappear the longer the mutual fund is held.
-Nowadays, many mutual funds have very low expense ratios, especially non-managed funds.
-Be leery of performance tables that do not take into account a load's effect on performance.
-When comparing an ETF with a mutual fund, investors should look beyond just the conventional fund vs. ETF label. Some apparently similar investment vehicles, even passively managed funds, may have important differences from each other which might favor one investing in a mutual fund, or vice versa.

not-simple-truths-etf-vs-mutual-fund-performance
Screeners:
https://etfdb.com/screener/
https://mutualfunds.com/screener/#etfs-anchor
https://mutualfunds.com/screener/

The current "opinion" is that capital gains hikes, if passed, would be retroactive, would apply to people making $500,000 or more. Supposedly step up in basis will only apply to $1,000,000 transactions.
Doubt many folks here will be affected if that is true, although it may prompt some selling. But if it is retroactive, it is too late.
I think the step up in basis is far more likely to hit the middle class, as baby boomers inherit the greatest generation's equity accounts.

I wonder what would happen if the cap gains hike was retroactive. No incentive to lock in gains at lower rate.

“Private-equity-owned Secure Home Holdings LLC filed for bankruptcy protection after its top-ranking lenders agreed to award themselves the home-security systems business, leaving unsecured creditors owed $110 million unpaid ... Bank lenders are owed, in the aggregate, about $197 million ...”
“The terms are proposed in a ‘prepackaged’ chapter 11 reorganization plan that Secure Home filed Monday, shortly after the Sunday bankruptcy filing. Ballots haven't been cast yet, but top lenders, led by affiliates of Invesco Ltd. , have agreed to cancel part of their debt in exchange for ownership of Secure Home.
“Funds managed by Oaktree Capital Management * mostly own Secure Home, with Ironwood Capital and Alcentra Capital Corp. as minority stakeholders. Oaktree declined to comment.”
The Wall Street Journal, April 27, 2021
* Oaktree Capital Management / The Oaktree Funds specialize in distressed debt and are headed by Howard Marks who is often quoted on the board.

“Top shareholders said they would vote against re-electing key Credit Suisse Group AG board members, a broadside against the bank’s leadership following a $5.5 billion loss from hedge fund Archegos Capital Management.
“At the bank’s annual meeting this Friday, Harris Associates* and Norges Bank Investment Management said they would vote against the reappointment of Andreas Gottschling, chairman of the bank’s risk committee. Mr. Gottschling joined the board in 2017 from the top risk job at Austria’s Erste Group Bank AG.
“David Herro, a partner at Harris Associates with a roughly 8% stake in Credit Suisse, said he would vote against Mr. Gottschling because he was the director in charge of risk.
“Norges, an arm of Norway’s central bank that runs its sovereign oil fund, owns around 3% of Credit Suisse. It said it would also oppose re-electing the lead independent director Severin Schwan, who is chief executive at Roche Holding AG , and Richard Meddings, a veteran British banker who joined the board last year ... Under Swiss rules, more than half of voting shares must go against a Director to block re-election.”
From: The Wall Street Journal - April 27, 2021 - Reported by Margot Patrick
* Since Harris Associates operates the Oakmark Funds, I’ve elected to include this under fund discussions.

Related thread I started back Nov 2020 when I sold my home. Yes, an agent is probably a necessity, but that doesn't mean you can't shop for the best value. It is a seller market and inventory is scarce...that should help you set the terms.
My agent split a 4 % commission with the buyer's agent. They list and manage all of the offers and there will be multiple offers.
I will say my 36 year old house was move in ready. I spent 3 months preparing the house for sale. It sold in one week...over asking. A good realtor will guide you through the process and maximize your profit.
https://mutualfundobserver.com/discuss/discussion/57098/your-home-is-not-an-investment#latest

"The soon-to-be-announced tax hike will treat those investment gains as wages for top earners and applies only to about 500,000 households, according to Brian Deese, who runs Biden's policy-writing National Economic Council."
***************************
And when will the SS cap be removed??????????? Shit.......

Just posted today:
"By Andrea Shalal and Trevor Hunnicutt, WASHINGTON (Reuters) -
President Joe Biden's forthcoming capital gains tax hike proposal would affect only a 0.3% slice of U.S. taxpayers, a top economic aide said on Monday.
Biden is set this week to propose nearly doubling taxes on capital gains to 39.6% for people earning more than $1 million, Reuters has reported, in what would be the highest tax rate on investment gains since the 1920s.
The soon-to-be-announced tax hike will treat those investment gains as wages for top earners and applies only to about 500,000 households, according to Brian Deese, who runs Biden's policy-writing National Economic Council."

Australia, New Zealand, Thailand & Japan top my list and no I don't think that a rise in the capital gains tax rate on the rich will sink stocks.

@bee - your "image" doesn't include a link to an image.
Below are a couple of links to Portfolio Visualizer; it's easy to tweak the inputs to see how things would go under different assumptions. With my usual qualifications that I'm setting PV up to run a simplistic, normal distribution model that bears only a passing resemblance to reality.
SS adjusts payments for inflation, so the calculations are in real, 2021 dollars. The cited article says that (in 2021 dollars) taking SS at age 62 for this person would pay $2060/mo, while waiting until age 70 would pay $3643/mo.
Thus, if one takes the money starting at age 62 and invests it, then starting at age 70 that nestegg would have to provide (in 2021 dollars) $1583/mo (the difference) until death for the same income. If you run out of nestegg money before death you lose - you draw only $2060 rather than $3643 from that point until death. If there's anything left of the nestegg when you die, you win. What's left over is your bonus.
I've set up the accumulation phase (age 62-70) to contribute $2060/mo, inflation adjusted. I've set inflation at 2%, 0 volatility, and rate of return at 7% with 12% volatility (about that of VWELX). Make sure to check the inflation adjusted box at the bottom of the graph (to get the value in 2021 dollars rather than nominal 2029 dollars). Mouse over the graph to get the age 70 value after 8 years.
You've got a 50/50 chance (50th percentile) of doing better or worse than about $235K.
For the age 70+ phase, you have to withdraw a net $1583 as explained above. Again, I've used 2% inflation, 0% volatility, 7% rate of return, 12% volatility. And I took the $235K from the accumulation phase as the starting portfolio value.
This will show you how long your nestegg might last - will it outlast your life (you win) or will it run out early (you lose)? It depends on the parameters you pick, what you expect your lifetime to be, and what percentile of likely outcomes you choose to look at.

PV Accumulation Phase
PV Age 70+ Phase (up to age 100)

@Baseball_Fan are you doing the class action lawsuit as filed by Rosen Law Firm? If you are, I am trying to figure out how to fill out the section under purchases and sales. I bought IQDAX in October of 2020 and sold some of it in January of 2021. The only categories for those transactions are common stock, bonds, preferred stock, puts, and calls. Since it is a mutual fund it falls under none of those categories. Also, do you happen to know that if we don't join a class action lawsuit, it is possible we would get none of our money back? Thanks for any input.

Another tidbit from Barron’s:
“The average institutional equity fund, which includes mutual funds and capital ETFs, Is now holding a relatively low 4% of its portfolio in cash, according to Bank of America, which says a figure any lower would be a signal to sell, while an increase to 5% would indicate a buy.”
(Barron’s April 26, 2021)
“Buy? Sell?” / Commentary from BOA is obviously a subjective opinion.

“In Schwab‘s recent earnings release, capital CEO Walt Bettinger noted that client activity exceeded anything the company had ever experienced. And some days, the brokerage firm handled as many as 10 million trades and 15,000,000 logins across its website and mobile platforms. The market volatility even attracted more investors - rather than scaring them away. A Schwab survey found that 15% of all current U.S. stock investors first began treating in 2020.”
(Schwab’s stock price has risen 27% YTD.)
From: The Striking Price: Sharp Swings Favor Schwab
Steven M. Sears, writing in Barron’s, April 26, 2021

https://www.financial-planning.com/list/bond-funds-with-the-worst-15-year-returns
Bond funds with the worst 15-year returns
By Andrew Shilling
All of the fixed-income industry’s worst long-term performers recorded gains over all time horizons, with only one in the red so far in 2021.
The 20 worst-performing bond funds of the past 15 years, with at least $100 million in assets under management, notched an average gain of nearly 1.5%, Morningstar Direct data show. Over the past 12 months, the same funds — all actively managed like those in last week’s top-performers ranking — had an average return of 2.28%.
With Treasury yields hovering around 1% over the better part of the decade, Amy Magnotta, co-head of discretionary portfolios at Brinker Capital Investments, says it’s no surprise that the industry's shortest-duration bond funds had a large presence.
“All of the funds on the list with the worst 15-year returns are short-term bond funds, both taxable and municipal,” Magnotta says, adding, “The yield on the one-year Treasury bill has averaged just 1.16% over the last 15 years, and it spent most of the time period below 1%, which is not an attractive starting point for returns of shorter maturity securities.”
For comparison, the iShares Core U.S. Aggregate Bond ETF (AGG), which has a 0.04% net expense ratio, recorded a 15-year gain of 4.29%, data show. Over the past year, the fund had a gain of 0.60%. The iShares 2-3 Year Treasury Bond ETF (SHY), which tracks the ICE BofA 1-3 Year Treasury Index, had 1- and 15-year gains of 0.17% and 2.2%, respectively.
In stocks, the SPDR S&P 500 ETF Trust (SPY) and the SPDR Dow Jones Industrial Average ETF (DIA) have had 15-year returns of 10.30% and 10.32%, respectively. In the past 12 months, SPY and DIA had gains of 48.69% and 44.79%. The funds have net expense ratios of 0.09% and 0.16%.
Fees among bond funds in this ranking were higher than the industry average. With an overall net expense ratio of 0.58%, funds here were only slightly pricier than the 0.45% investors paid for fund investing in 2019, according to Morningstar’s most recent annual fee survey.
When discussing bond fund performance over any time horizon with clients, Magnotta says it’s key to also have a conversation about their role in a diversified portfolio.***
Anyone owe these lemons?

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/a-capital-gains-tax-hike-might-sink-stocks-heres-how-financial-advisers-and-their-clients-can-stay-a-step-ahead-11619222398
A capital gains tax hike might sink stocks. Here’s how financial advisers and their clients can stay a step ahead.
Higher taxes for the ultra-wealthy when they sell stocks would have a ripple effect on all investors
Many financial advisers follow Warren Buffett’s lead, adopting a buy-and-hold mentality and urging jittery clients to shrug off scary headlines to achieve long-term gains. But what if those headlines signal a threat to a long-term investment plan?***
More muni tax exempt bonds eh??? Think we heard that advise numerous time in this forum

Rbrt: "I think FD and I have discussed this before - we both think buying equity mutual funds is investing and we both think buying bond mutual funds in investing. However, I think buying a cash investment fund is also investing. FD does not."
Schwab has a number of mutual funds that they offer for cash. SWVXX is their default fund for the cash you accumulate, when you sell a fund focused on equities, bonds, and other volatile assets. However, Schwab has several alternative funds that you can also select that have more security, such as government guaranteed assets, which many of us, chose at the height of 2020 crash selling options. It is a form of investing, but more based on what level of security you want, and type of asset you most trust. If you had a large amount of cash, you could get a higher amount of interest with some of the alternative options to their default account. When I was with Fidelity, you had similar options/alternatives, that Fidelity allowed for cash accounts. You are not going to make any meaningful total return with such funds, but sometimes investing involves putting your cash in funds that rarely, if ever, lose money, and have a NAV that stays the same under all types of market conditions.

(This one will probably run off the tracks - though wasn’t the intent.)
* I’ll roughly summarize a second interesting tidbit from Forsyth this week:
- Private pension funds have done well lately, now being on average 98.4% fully funded - up 17% from July 2020. There’s 2 reasons. First, the hot equities markets / Second, the increase in interest rates which allows the pension funds to inject higher expected bond returns into their formulas.
- Pension funds can lock in these advances in funding by selling equities and buying bonds at relatively higher rates than before (which might help explain why rates reversed and headed down recently).
- Public pension plans haven’t done as well as the private, starting from a worse position. However, there’s wide disparity, with the better ones currently 90+% fully funded.
- The incentive for public plans to sell equities in favor of bonds is therefore less.

“Only 25% of U.S. equities are owned by U.S. taxable investors, with the remaining 75% held by people and entities not subject to capital gains levies, such as pension plans and other retirement accounts, endowments, and foreign investors ... (according to UBS).”
From Randall W. Forsyth - Barron’s April 26, 2021