BMN BlackRock 2037 Municipal Target Term Trust

UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

FORM N-CSR

CERTIFIED SHAREHOLDER REPORT OF REGISTERED MANAGEMENT

INVESTMENT COMPANIES

Investment Company Act file number: 811-23621

 

Name of Fund:

BlackRock 2037 Municipal Target Term Trust (BMN)

 

Fund Address:

100 Bellevue Parkway, Wilmington, DE 19809

Name and address of agent for service: John M. Perlowski, Chief Executive Officer, BlackRock 2037 Municipal Target Term Trust, 50 Hudson Yards, New York, NY 10001

Registrant’s telephone number, including area code: (800) 882-0052, Option 4

Date of fiscal year end: 12/31/2023

Date of reporting period: 12/31/2023

 

---

Item 1 – Report to Stockholders

(a) The Report to Shareholders is attached herewith.

---

 

		DECEMBER 31, 2023

 

		2023 Annual Report

 

BlackRock 2037 Municipal Target Term Trust (BMN)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Not FDIC Insured • May Lose Value • No Bank Guarantee

---

 

 

2		T H I S  P A G E  I S  N O T  P A R T  O F  Y O U R  F U N D  R E P O R T

---

Table of Contents

 

		Page
The Markets in Review			2
Annual Report:
Municipal Market Overview			4
The Benefits and Risks of Leveraging			5
Trust Summary			6
Financial Statements:
Schedule of Investments			9
Statement of Assets and Liabilities			13
Statement of Operations			14
Statements of Changes in Net Assets			15
Financial Highlights			16
Notes to Financial Statements			17
Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm			23
Important Tax Information			24
Investment Objectives, Policies and Risks			25
Automatic Dividend Reinvestment Plan			31
Trustee and Officer Information			32
Additional Information			36
Glossary of Terms Used in this Report			39

 

 

		3

---

Municipal Market Overview  For the Reporting Period Ended December 31, 2023

 

Municipal Market Conditions

After initial optimism at the start of the year spurred strong performance, munis subsequently struggled as the Fed continued its tightening policy, raising fed fund rates to 5.25%-5.50%, before pausing in September. The 10-year U.S. Treasury yield sold off, peaking at 5% in mid-October, and the Bloomberg Muni Bond Index was down by 2.30% on a year-to-date basis by late October. However, falling inflation, weakening economic growth, and the prolonged Fed pause led to more dovish expectations for monetary policy, causing a strong interest rate rally into year-end. Favorable technicals, backed by strong fundamentals, were key drivers of municipal outperformance versus comparable U.S. Treasuries. Lower-rated credits and the long-end of the curve performed best.

 

During the 12-months ended December 31, 2023, municipal bond funds experienced net outflows totaling $21 billion (based on data from the Investment Company Institute), as demand shifted from funds to individual bonds and ETFs. At the same time, the market contended with just $359 billion in issuance, a small 2% increase from 2022, as issuers shied away from rising rates and volatility.				Bloomberg Municipal Bond Index  Total Returns as of December 31, 2023   6 months: 3.63%  12 months: 6.40%

A Closer Look at Yields

 

AAA Municipal Yield Curves		From December 31, 2022 to December 31, 2023, yields on AAA-rated 30-year municipal bonds decreased by 16 basis points (bps) from 3.58% to 3.42%, ten-year yields decreased by 35 bps from 2.63% to 2.28%, five-year yields decreased by 24 bps from 2.52% to 2.28%, and two-year yields decreased by 8 bps from 2.60% to 2.52% (as measured by Refinitiv Municipal Market Data). As a result, the municipal yield curve flattened over the 12-month period with the spread between two- and 30-year maturities flattening by 8 bps to a slope of 90 bps. Still, the curve remained relatively steep compared to the inverted U.S. Treasury curve.   Outperformance throughout the period pushed relative valuations to extremely rich levels. Municipal-to-Treasury ratios ended well through their 5-year averages across the curve, with intermediate maturities approaching all-time lows.
Source: Thomson Municipal Market Data.

Financial Conditions of Municipal Issuers

With reserves at nearly an all-time high and debt service burden at a 50-year low, states are well-positioned to weather a potential economic slowdown. However, tax receipts are diverging for the states that primarily rely on consumption taxes, compared to their peers that depend on income taxes. State median revenues declined by a slight 1% for the rolling 12-months ending September 2023. States with regimes that favor sales taxes, such as Florida, Nevada, Texas, Tennessee, and Washington, all experienced positive revenue growth, while states that depend on personal income taxes, such as California and New York, experienced much greater declines in receipts, by 23% and 16%, respectively. Particularly in California’s case, the rating agencies have been patient, but the risk of downgrades has increased significantly. Meanwhile spreads remain surprisingly tight, reflecting investor indifference. Personal income tax collections should improve this April, due to a rebound in the financial markets, which should alleviate the strain on New York’s budget, but California will need to enact significant corrective action to address its reported $68 billion deficit. No sector is immune to an economic contraction; however, most municipal issuers are ultra-defensive since they provide essential services and can raise user fees or taxes to cover operations. Across all muni sectors, we anticipate borrowing to increase modestly in 2024 due to various potential factors: revenue shortfalls, aversion to fee increases, reluctance to cut programs, no future federal stimulus, preference to maintain liquidity, and deferral of capital expenditures. Patient investors will have better options in 2024 to buy solid credits in the primary market or discounted names in the secondary market.

The opinions expressed are those of BlackRock as of December 31, 2023 and are subject to change at any time due to changes in market or economic conditions. The comments should not be construed as a recommendation of any individual holdings or market sectors. Investing involves risk including loss of principal. Bond values fluctuate in price so the value of your investment can go down depending on market conditions. Fixed income risks include interest-rate and credit risk. Typically, when interest rates rise, there is a corresponding decline in bond values. Credit risk refers to the possibility that the bond issuer will not be able to make principal and interest payments. There may be less information on the financial condition of municipal issuers than for public corporations. The market for municipal bonds may be less liquid than for taxable bonds. Some investors may be subject to Alternative Minimum Tax (“AMT”). Capital gains distributions, if any, are taxable.

The Bloomberg Municipal Bond Index, a broad, market value-weighted index, seeks to measure the performance of the U.S. municipal bond market. All bonds in the index are exempt from U.S. federal income taxes or subject to the AMT. Past performance is not an indication of future results. Index performance is shown for illustrative purposes only. It is not possible to invest directly in an index.

 

 

4		2 0 2 3  B L A C K R O C K  A N N U A L  R E P O R T  T O  S H A R E H O L D E R S

---

The Benefits and Risks of Leveraging

 

The Trust may utilize leverage to seek to enhance the distribution rate on, and net asset value (“NAV”) of, its common shares (“Common Shares”). However, there is no guarantee that these objectives can be achieved in all interest rate environments.

In general, the concept of leveraging is based on the premise that the financing cost of leverage, which is based on short-term interest rates, is normally lower than the income earned by the Trust on its longer-term portfolio investments purchased with the proceeds from leverage. To the extent that the total assets of the Trust (including the assets obtained from leverage) are invested in higher-yielding portfolio investments, the Trust’s shareholders benefit from the incremental net income. The interest earned on securities purchased with the proceeds from leverage (after paying the leverage costs) is paid to shareholders in the form of dividends, and the value of these portfolio holdings (less the leverage liability) is reflected in the per share NAV.

To illustrate these concepts, assume the Trust’s capitalization is $100 million and it utilizes leverage for an additional $30 million, creating a total value of $130 million available for investment in longer-term income securities. If prevailing short-term interest rates are 3% and longer-term interest rates are 6%, the yield curve has a strongly positive slope. In this case, the Trust’s financing costs on the $30 million of proceeds obtained from leverage are based on the lower short-term interest rates. At the same time, the securities purchased by the Trust with the proceeds from leverage earn income based on longer-term interest rates. In this case, the Trust’s financing cost of leverage is significantly lower than the income earned on the Trust’s longer-term investments acquired from such leverage proceeds, and therefore the holders of Common Shares (“Common Shareholders”) are the beneficiaries of the incremental net income.

However, in order to benefit shareholders, the return on assets purchased with leverage proceeds must exceed the ongoing costs associated with the leverage. If interest and other costs of leverage exceed the Trust’s return on assets purchased with leverage proceeds, income to shareholders is lower than if the Trust had not used leverage. Furthermore, the value of the Trust’s portfolio investments generally varies inversely with the direction of long-term interest rates, although other factors can influence the value of portfolio investments. In contrast, the amount of the Trust’s obligations under its leverage arrangement generally does not fluctuate in relation to interest rates. As a result, changes in interest rates can influence the Trust’s NAVs positively or negatively. Changes in the future direction of interest rates are very difficult to predict accurately, and there is no assurance that the Trust’s intended leveraging strategy will be successful.

The use of leverage also generally causes greater changes in the Trust’s NAV, market price and dividend rates than comparable portfolios without leverage. In a declining market, leverage is likely to cause a greater decline in the NAV and market price of the Trust’s shares than if the Trust were not leveraged. In addition, the Trust may be required to sell portfolio securities at inopportune times or at distressed values in order to comply with regulatory requirements applicable to the use of leverage or as required by the terms of leverage instruments, which may cause the Trust to incur losses. The use of leverage may limit the Trust’s ability to invest in certain types of securities or use certain types of hedging strategies. The Trust incurs expenses in connection with the use of leverage, all of which are borne by shareholders and may reduce income to the shareholders. Moreover, to the extent the calculation of the Trust’s investment advisory fees includes assets purchased with the proceeds of leverage, the investment advisory fees payable to the Trust’s investment adviser will be higher than if the Trust did not use leverage.

The Trust may utilize leverage through the use of tender option bond trusts (“TOB Trusts”) as described in the Notes to Financial Statements, if applicable.

Under the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended (the “1940 Act”), the Trust is permitted to issue debt securities up to 33 1/3% of its total managed assets. The Trust may voluntarily elect to limit its leverage to less than the maximum amount permitted under the 1940 Act.

 

 

T H E  B E N E F I T S  A N D  R I S K S  O F  L E V E R A G I N G		5

---

Trust Summary  as of December 31, 2023		BlackRock 2037 Municipal Target Term Trust (BMN)

 

Investment Objective

BlackRock 2037 MunicipalTargetTermTrust’s (BMN) (the “Trust”) investment objectives are to provide current income that is exempt from regular federal income tax (but which may be subject to the federal alternative minimum tax in certain circumstances) and to return $25.00 per common share (the initial public offering price per common share) to holders of common shares on or about September 30, 2037. Under normal market conditions, the Trust invests at least 80% of its Managed Assets in municipal securities. The Trust invests primarily in investment grade quality securities or securities that are unrated but judged to be of comparable quality by the investment adviser.

There is no assurance that the Trust will achieve its investment objectives, including its investment objective of returning $25.00 per share.

Trust Information

 

Symbol on New York Stock Exchange		BMN
Initial Offering Date		October 28, 2022
Termination Date		September 30, 2037
Yield on Closing Market Price as of December 31, 2023 ($ 23.78)(a)		4.73%
Tax Equivalent Yield(b)		7.99%
Current Monthly Distribution per Common Share(c)		$0.093750
Current Annualized Distribution per Common Share(c)		$1.125000
Leverage as of December 31, 2023(d)		7%

 

(a)

Yield on closing market price is calculated by dividing the current annualized distribution per share by the closing market price. Past performance is not an indication of future results.

(b)

Tax equivalent yield assumes the maximum marginal U.S. federal tax rate of 40.8%, which includes the 3.8% Medicare tax. Actual tax rates will vary based on income, exemptions and deductions. Lower taxes will result in lower tax equivalent yields.

(c)

The distribution rate is not constant and is subject to change. A portion of the distribution may be deemed a return of capital or net realized gain.

(d)

Represents TOB Trusts as a percentage of total managed assets, which is the total assets of the Trust, including any assets attributable to TOB Trusts, minus the sum of its accrued liabilities. Does not reflect derivatives or other instruments that may give rise to economic leverage. For a discussion of leveraging techniques utilized by the Trust, please see The Benefits and Risks of Leveraging.

Market Price and Net Asset Value Per Share Summary

 

			12/31/23				12/31/22				Change				High				Low
Closing Market Price		$	23.78			$	24.44				(2.70	)%		$	25.55			$	21.65
Net Asset Value			26.20				25.42				3.07				26.20				24.03

GROWTH OF $10,000 INVESTMENT

 

BMN commenced operations on October 28, 2022.

(a)

Represents the Trust’s closing market price on the NYSE and reflects the reinvestment of dividends and/or distributions at actual reinvestment prices.

(b)

An unmanaged index that tracks the U.S. long term tax-exempt bond market, including state and local general obligation bonds, revenue bonds, pre-refunded bonds, and insured bonds.

 

 

6		2 0 2 3  B L A C K R O C K  A N N U A L  R E P O R T  T O  S H A R E H O L D E R S

---

Trust Summary  as of December 31, 2023 (continued)		BlackRock 2037 Municipal Target Term Trust (BMN)

 

Performance

Returns for the period ended December 31, 2023 were as follows:

 

		Average Annual Total Returns
		1 Year				Since Inception(a)
Trust at NAV(b)(c)			7.97	%			8.26	%
Trust at Market Price(b)(c)			1.92				(0.31	)
Customized Reference Benchmark(d)			9.02				15.64
Bloomberg Municipal Bond Index			6.40				9.99

 

(a)

BMN commenced operations on October 28, 2022.

(b)

All returns reflect reinvestment of dividends and/or distributions at actual reinvestment prices. Performance results reflect the Trust’s use of leverage, if any.

(c)

The Trust’s discount to NAV widened during the period, which accounts for the difference between performance based on market price and performance based on NAV.

(d)

The Customized Reference Benchmark is comprised of the Bloomberg Municipal Bond Index (75%) and the Bloomberg Municipal Bond: High Yield (non-Investment Grade) 2037 Total Return Index (25%).

Performance results may include adjustments made for financial reporting purposes in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles. Past performance is not an indication of future results.

The Trust is presenting the performance of one or more indices for informational purposes only. The Trust is actively managed and does not seek to track or replicate the performance of any index. The index performance shown is not intended to be indicative of the Trust’s investment strategies, portfolio components or past or future performance.

More information about the Trust’s historical performance can be found in the “Closed End Funds” section of blackrock.com.

The following discussion relates to the Trust’s absolute performance based on NAV:

On a sector basis, transportation and housing stood out as top performers during a period in which all sectors produced positive returns. While all ratings categories contributed to relative performance, AA and A rated bonds had the largest positive impact. Due to its term structure, the Trust had a concentration in bonds with 12- to 18-year maturities. As a result, this market segment generated the bulk of the Trust’s total return. Bonds with 5% coupons were also notable contributors to absolute returns given their large portfolio weighting. On the other hand, a position in a high-yield security in the corporate sector experienced a price decline due to negative credit trends. The overall impact on the Trust was small.

The views expressed reflect the opinions of BlackRock as of the date of this report and are subject to change based on changes in market, economic or other conditions. These views are not intended to be a forecast of future events and are no guarantee of future results.

 

 

T R U S T S U M M A R Y		7

---

 

Trust Summary  as of December 31, 2023 (continued)		BlackRock 2037 Municipal Target Term Trust (BMN)

 

Overview of the Trust’s Total Investments

 

 

(a)	Excludes short-term securities.

(b)

For Trust compliance purposes, the Trust’s sector classifications refer to one or more of the sector sub-classifications used by one or more widely recognized market indexes or rating group indexes, and/or as defined by the investment adviser. These definitions may not apply for purposes of this report, which may combine such sector sub-classifications for reporting ease.

(c)	Scheduled maturity dates and/or bonds that are subject to potential calls by issuers over the next five years.

(d)

For financial reporting purposes, credit quality ratings shown above reflect the highest rating assigned by either S&P Global Ratings or Moody’s Investors Service, Inc. if ratings differ. These rating agencies are independent, nationally recognized statistical rating organizations and are widely used. Investment grade ratings are credit ratings of BBB/Baa or higher. Below investment grade ratings are credit ratings of BB/Ba or lower. Investments designated N/R are not rated by either rating agency. Unrated investments do not necessarily indicate low credit quality. Credit quality ratings are subject to change.

(e)

The investment adviser evaluates the credit quality of unrated investments based upon certain factors including, but not limited to, credit ratings for similar investments and financial analysis of sectors and individual investments. Using this approach, the investment adviser has deemed certain of these unrated securities as investment grade quality. As of December 31, 2023, the market value of unrated securities deemed by the investment adviser to be investment grade represents 2.7% of the Trust’s total investments.

 

 

8		2 0 2 3  B L A C K R O C K  A N N U A L  R E P O R T  T O  S H A R E H O L D E R S

---

Schedule of Investments December 31, 2023		BlackRock 2037 Municipal Target Term Trust (BMN) (Percentages shown are based on Net Assets)

 

 

 

S C H E D U L E  O F  I N V E S T M E N T S		9

---

Schedule of Investments (continued) December 31, 2023		BlackRock 2037 Municipal Target Term Trust (BMN) (Percentages shown are based on Net Assets)

 

 

 

10		2 0 2 3  B L A C K R O C K  A N N U A L  R E P O R T  T O  S H A R E H O L D E R S

---

Schedule of Investments (continued) December 31, 2023		BlackRock 2037 Municipal Target Term Trust (BMN) (Percentages shown are based on Net Assets)

 

 

Affiliates

Investments in issuers considered to be affiliate(s) of the Trust during the year ended December 31, 2023 for purposes of Section 2(a)(3) of the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended, were as follows:

 

		Affiliated Issuer		Value at 12/31/22				Purchases at Cost				Proceeds from Sale				Net Realized Gain (Loss)				Change in Unrealized Appreciation (Depreciation)						Value at 12/31/23				Shares Held at 12/31/23				Income				Capital Gain Distributions from Underlying Funds
		BlackRock Liquidity Funds, MuniCash, Institutional Class		$	95,787			$	1,964,819	(a)		$	—			$	(987)					$	116			$	2,059,735				2,059,529			$	115,702			$	—

 

(a)	Represents net amount purchased (sold).

 

 

S C H E D U L E  O F  I N V E S T M E N T S		11

---

Schedule of Investments (continued) December 31, 2023		BlackRock 2037 Municipal Target Term Trust (BMN)

 

Fair Value Hierarchy as of Period End

Various inputs are used in determining the fair value of financial instruments. For a description of the input levels and information about the Trust’s policy regarding valuation of financial instruments, refer to the Notes to Financial Statements.

The following table summarizes the Trust’s financial instruments categorized in the fair value hierarchy. The breakdown of the Trust’s financial instruments into major categories is disclosed in the Schedule of Investments above.

 

		Level 1								Level 2								Level 3								Total
Assets
Investments
Long-Term Investments
Municipal Bonds		$	—							$	149,456,548							$	—							$	149,456,548
Municipal Bonds Transferred to Tender Option Bond Trusts			—								20,302,065								—								20,302,065
Short-Term Securities
Money Market Funds			2,059,735								—								—								2,059,735
		$	2,059,735							$	169,758,613							$	—							$	171,818,348

The Trust may hold assets and/or liabilities in which the fair value approximates the carrying amount for financial statement purposes. As of period end, TOB Trust Certificates of $12,335,000 are categorized as Level 2 within the fair value hierarchy.

See notes to financial statements.

 

 

12		2 0 2 3  B L A C K R O C K  A N N U A L  R E P O R T  T O  S H A R E H O L D E R S

---

Statement of Assets and Liabilities

December 31, 2023

 

		BMN
ASSETS
Investments, at value — unaffiliated(a)		$	169,758,613
Investments, at value — affiliated(b)			2,059,735
Receivables:
Dividends — affiliated			4,096
Interest — unaffiliated			1,812,818
Prepaid expenses			1,526
Total assets			173,636,788
ACCRUED LIABILITIES
Payables:
Accounting services fees			13,085
Custodian fees			590
Income dividend distributions			46,543
Interest expense and fees			55,391
Investment advisory fees			80,251
Trustees’ and Officer’s fees			2,883
Other accrued expenses			1,449
Professional fees			53,595
Transfer agent fees			3,349
Total accrued liabilities			257,136
OTHER LIABILITIES
TOB Trust Certificates			12,335,000
Total liabilities			12,592,136
Commitments and contingent liabilities
NET ASSETS		$	161,044,652
NET ASSETS APPLICABLE TO COMMON SHAREHOLDERS CONSIST OF
Paid-in capital(c)(d)(e)		$	153,691,325
Accumulated earnings			7,353,327
NET ASSETS		$	161,044,652
Net asset value		$	26.20
(a) Investments, at cost — unaffiliated		$	162,518,387
(b) Investments, at cost — affiliated		$	2,059,619
(c)  Shares outstanding			6,147,653
(d) Shares authorized			Unlimited
(e) Par value		$	0.001

See notes to financial statements.

 

 

F I N A N C I A L  S T A T E M E N T S		13

---

Statement of Operations

Year Ended December 31, 2023

 

		BMN
INVESTMENT INCOME
Dividends — affiliated		$	115,702
Interest — unaffiliated			7,450,386
Total investment income			7,566,088
EXPENSES
Investment advisory			871,671
Professional			62,379
Accounting services			40,432
Transfer agent			32,578
Printing and postage			15,033
Trustees and Officer			9,828
Custodian			8,861
Registration			8,367
Miscellaneous			6,235
Total expenses excluding interest expense and fees			1,055,384
Interest expense and fees(a)			70,249
Total expenses			1,125,633
Less:
Fees waived and/or reimbursed by the Manager			(3,808	)
Total expenses after fees waived and/or reimbursed			1,121,825
Net investment income			6,444,263
REALIZED AND UNREALIZED GAIN (LOSS)
Net realized loss from:
Investments — unaffiliated			(43,280	)
Investments — affiliated			(987	)
			(44,267	)
Net change in unrealized appreciation (depreciation) on:
Investments — unaffiliated			5,327,379
Investments — affiliated			116
			5,327,495
Net realized and unrealized gain			5,283,228
NET INCREASE IN NET ASSETS RESULTING FROM OPERATIONS		$	11,727,491
(a) Related to TOB Trusts.

See notes to financial statements.

 

 

14		2 0 2 3  B L A C K R O C K  A N N U A L  R E P O R T  T O  S H A R E H O L D E R S

---

 

Statements of Changes in Net Assets

 

		BMN
		Year Ended 12/31/23				Period from 10/28/22(a) to 12/31/22
INCREASE (DECREASE) IN NET ASSETS
OPERATIONS
Net investment income		$	6,444,263			$	630,507
Net realized gain (loss)			(44,267	)			11,926
Net change in unrealized appreciation (depreciation)			5,327,495				1,912,847
Net increase in net assets resulting from operations			11,727,491				2,555,280
DISTRIBUTIONS TO SHAREHOLDERS(b)
Decrease in net assets resulting from distributions to shareholders			(6,929,444	)			—
CAPITAL SHARE TRANSACTIONS
Net proceeds from the issuance of shares			—				153,691,325
NET ASSETS
Total increase in net assets			4,798,047				156,246,605
Beginning of period			156,246,605				—
End of period		$	161,044,652			$	156,246,605

 

(a)	Commencement of operations.

(b)	Distributions for annual periods determined in accordance with U.S. federal income tax regulations.

See notes to financial statements.

 

 

F I N A N C I A L  S T A T E M E N T S		15

---

Financial Highlights

(For a share outstanding throughout each period)

 

						BMN
						Year Ended 12/31/23								Period from 10/28/22(a) to 12/31/22
Net asset value, beginning of period						$	25.42							$	25.00
Net investment income(b)							1.05								0.11
Net realized and unrealized gain							0.86								0.31
Net increase from investment operations							1.91								0.42
Distributions from net investment income(c)							(1.13	)							—
Net asset value, end of period						$	26.20							$	25.42
Market price, end of period						$	23.78							$	24.44
Total Return(d)
Based on net asset value							7.97	%							1.68	%(e)
Based on market price							1.92	%							(2.24	)%(e)
Ratios to Average Net Assets(f)
Total expenses							0.72	%							0.65	%(g)(h)
Total expenses after fees waived and/or reimbursed							0.72	%							0.61	%(g)(h)
Total expenses after fees waived and/or reimbursed and excluding interest expense							0.67	%							0.61	%
Net investment income							4.11	%							2.60	%(h)
Supplemental Data
Net assets, end of period (000)						$	161,045							$	156,247
TOB Trust Certificates, end of period (000)						$	12,335							$	—
Asset coverage per $1,000 of TOB Trust Certificates, end of period						$	14,056								N/A
Portfolio turnover rate							20	%							38	%

 

(a)	Commencement of operations.

(b)	Based on average shares outstanding.

(c)	Distributions for annual periods determined in accordance with U.S. federal income tax regulations.

(d)	Total returns based on market price, which can be significantly greater or less than the net asset value, may result in substantially different returns. Where applicable, excludes the effects of any sales charges and assumes the reinvestment of distributions at actual reinvestment prices.

(e)	Not annualized.

(f)	Excludes fees and expenses incurred indirectly as a result of investments in underlying funds.

(g)	Audit and printing costs were not annualized in the calculation of the expense ratios. If these expenses were annualized, the total expenses and total expenses after fees waived and/or reimbursed would have been 0.80% and 0.76%.

(h)	Annualized.

See notes to financial statements.

 

 

16		2 0 2 3  B L A C K R O C K  A N N U A L  R E P O R T  T O  S H A R E H O L D E R S

---

Notes to Financial Statements

 

1.	ORGANIZATION

BlackRock 2037 Municipal Target Term Trust (the “Trust”) is registered under the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended (the “1940 Act”). The Trust is registered as a non-diversified, closed-end management investment company. The Trust is organized as a Maryland statutory trust. The Trust determines and makes available for publication the net asset value (“NAV”) of its Common Shares on a daily basis.

The Trust, together with certain other registered investment companies advised by BlackRock Advisors, LLC (the “Manager”) or its affiliates, is included in a complex of funds referred to as the BlackRock Fixed-Income Complex.

 

2.	SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES

The financial statements are prepared in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (“U.S. GAAP”), which may require management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities in the financial statements, disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the reported amounts of increases and decreases in net assets from operations during the reporting period. Actual results could differ from those estimates. The Trust is considered an investment company under U.S. GAAP and follows the accounting and reporting guidance applicable to investment companies. Below is a summary of significant accounting policies:

Investment Transactions and Income Recognition: For financial reporting purposes, investment transactions are recorded on the dates the transactions are executed. Realized gains and losses on investment transactions are determined using the specific identification method. Dividend income and capital gain distributions, if any, are recorded on the ex-dividend dates. Non-cash dividends, if any, are recorded on the ex-dividend dates at fair value. Interest income, including amortization and accretion of premiums and discounts on debt securities, is recognized daily on an accrual basis.

Bank Overdraft: The Trust had outstanding cash disbursements exceeding deposited cash amounts at the custodian during the reporting period. The Trust is obligated to repay the custodian for any overdraft, including any related costs or expenses, where applicable. For financial reporting purposes, overdraft fees, if any, are included in interest expense in the Statement of Operations.

Collateralization: If required by an exchange or counterparty agreement, the Trust may be required to deliver/deposit cash and/or securities to/with an exchange, or broker-dealer or custodian as collateral for certain investments.

Distributions: Distributions from net investment income are declared and paid monthly. Distributions of capital gains are recorded on the ex-dividend dates and made at least annually. The character and timing of distributions are determined in accordance with U.S. federal income tax regulations, which may differ from U.S. GAAP.

Deferred Compensation Plan: Under the Deferred Compensation Plan (the “Plan”) approved by the Board of Trustees of the Trust (the “Board”), the trustees who are not “interested persons” of the Trust, as defined in the 1940 Act (“Independent Trustees”), may defer a portion of their annual complex-wide compensation. Deferred amounts earn an approximate return as though equivalent dollar amounts had been invested in common shares of certain funds in the BlackRock Fixed-Income Complex selected by the Independent Trustees. This has the same economic effect for the Independent Trustees as if the Independent Trustees had invested the deferred amounts directly in certain funds in the BlackRock Fixed-Income Complex.

The Plan is not funded and obligations thereunder represent general unsecured claims against the general assets of the Trust, as applicable. Deferred compensation liabilities, if any, are included in the Trustees’ and Officer’s fees payable in the Statement of Assets and Liabilities and will remain as a liability of the Trust until such amounts are distributed in accordance with the Plan. Net appreciation (depreciation) in the value of participants’ deferral accounts is allocated among the participating funds in the BlackRock Fixed-Income Complex and reflected as Trustees and Officer expense on the Statement of Operations. The Trustees and Officer expense may be negative as a result of a decrease in value of the deferred accounts.

Indemnifications: In the normal course of business, the Trust enters into contracts that contain a variety of representations that provide general indemnification. The Trust’s maximum exposure under these arrangements is unknown because it involves future potential claims against the Trust, which cannot be predicted with any certainty.

Other: Expenses directly related to the Trust are charged to the Trust. Other operating expenses shared by several funds, including other funds managed by the Manager, are prorated among those funds on the basis of relative net assets or other appropriate methods.

 

3.	INVESTMENT VALUATION AND FAIR VALUE MEASUREMENTS

Investment Valuation Policies: The Trust’s investments are valued at fair value (also referred to as “market value” within the financial statements) each day that the Trust is open for business and, for financial reporting purposes, as of the report date. U.S. GAAP defines fair value as the price a fund would receive to sell an asset or pay to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement date. The Board has approved the designation of the Trust’s Manager as the valuation designee for the Trust. The Trust determines the fair values of its financial instruments using various independent dealers or pricing services under the Manager’s policies. If a security’s market price is not readily available or does not otherwise accurately represent the fair value of the security, the security will be valued in accordance with the Manager’s policies and procedures as reflecting fair value. The Manager has formed a committee (the “Valuation Committee”) to develop pricing policies and procedures and to oversee the pricing function for all financial instruments, with assistance from other BlackRock pricing committees.

Fair Value Inputs and Methodologies: The following methods and inputs are used to establish the fair value of the Trust’s assets and liabilities:

 

·

Fixed-income investments for which market quotations are readily available are generally valued using the last available bid price or current market quotations provided by independent dealers or third-party pricing services. Floating rate loan interests are valued at the mean of the bid prices from one or more

 

 

N O T E S  T O  F I N A N C I A L  S T A T E M E N T S		17

---

Notes to Financial Statements (continued)

 

independent brokers or dealers as obtained from a third-party pricing service. Pricing services generally value fixed-income securities assuming orderly transactions of an institutional round lot size, but a fund may hold or transact in such securities in smaller, odd lot sizes. Odd lots may trade at lower prices than institutional round lots. The pricing services may use matrix pricing or valuation models that utilize certain inputs and assumptions to derive values, including transaction data (e.g., recent representative bids and offers), market data, credit quality information, perceived market movements, news, and other relevant information. Certain fixed-income securities, including asset-backed and mortgage related securities may be valued based on valuation models that consider the estimated cash flows of each tranche of the entity, establish a benchmark yield and develop an estimated tranche specific spread to the benchmark yield based on the unique attributes of the tranche. The amortized cost method of valuation may be used with respect to debt obligations with sixty days or less remaining to maturity unless the Manager determines such method does not represent fair value.

 

·

Investments in open-end U.S. mutual funds (including money market funds) are valued at that day’s published NAV.

If events (e.g., market volatility, company announcement or a natural disaster) occur that are expected to materially affect the value of such investment, or in the event that application of these methods of valuation results in a price for an investment that is deemed not to be representative of the market value of such investment, or if a price is not available, the investment will be valued by the Valuation Committee in accordance with the Manager’s policies and procedures as reflecting fair value (“Fair Valued Investments”). The fair valuation approaches that may be used by the Valuation Committee include market approach, income approach and cost approach. Valuation techniques such as discounted cash flow, use of market comparables and matrix pricing are types of valuation approaches and are typically used in determining fair value. When determining the price for Fair Valued Investments, the Valuation Committee seeks to determine the price that the Trust might reasonably expect to receive or pay from the current sale or purchase of that asset or liability in an arm’s-length transaction. Fair value determinations shall be based upon all available factors that the Valuation Committee deems relevant and consistent with the principles of fair value measurement.

Fair Value Hierarchy: Various inputs are used in determining the fair value of financial instruments. These inputs to valuation techniques are categorized into a fair value hierarchy consisting of three broad levels for financial reporting purposes as follows:

 

·

Level 1 – Unadjusted price quotations in active markets/exchanges for identical assets or liabilities that the Trust has the ability to access;

 

·

Level 2 – Other observable inputs (including, but not limited to, quoted prices for similar assets or liabilities in markets that are active, quoted prices for identical or similar assets or liabilities in markets that are not active, inputs other than quoted prices that are observable for the assets or liabilities (such as interest rates, yield curves, volatilities, prepayment speeds, loss severities, credit risks and default rates) or other market–corroborated inputs); and

 

·

Level 3 – Unobservable inputs based on the best information available in the circumstances, to the extent observable inputs are not available (including the Valuation Committee’s assumptions used in determining the fair value of financial instruments).

The hierarchy gives the highest priority to unadjusted quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities (Level 1 measurements) and the lowest priority to unobservable inputs (Level 3 measurements). Accordingly, the degree of judgment exercised in determining fair value is greatest for instruments categorized in Level 3. The inputs used to measure fair value may fall into different levels of the fair value hierarchy. In such cases, for disclosure purposes, the fair value hierarchy classification is determined based on the lowest level input that is significant to the fair value measurement in its entirety. Investments classified within Level 3 have significant unobservable inputs used by the Valuation Committee in determining the price for Fair Valued Investments. Level 3 investments include equity or debt issued by privately held companies or funds that may not have a secondary market and/or may have a limited number of investors. The categorization of a value determined for financial instruments is based on the pricing transparency of the financial instruments and is not necessarily an indication of the risks associated with investing in those securities.

 

4.	SECURITIES AND OTHER INVESTMENTS

Zero-Coupon Bonds: Zero-coupon bonds are normally issued at a significant discount from face value and do not provide for periodic interest payments. These bonds may experience greater volatility in market value than other debt obligations of similar maturity which provide for regular interest payments.

Municipal Bonds Transferred to TOB Trusts: The Trust leverages its assets through the use of “TOB Trust” transactions. The fund transfers municipal bonds into a special purpose trust (a “TOB Trust”). A TOB Trust issues two classes of beneficial interests: short-term floating rate interests (“TOB Trust Certificates”), which are sold to third-party investors, and residual inverse floating rate interests (“TOB Residuals”), which are issued to the participating fund that contributed the municipal bonds to the TOB Trust. The TOB Trust Certificates have interest rates that reset weekly and their holders have the option to tender such certificates to the TOB Trust for redemption at par and any accrued interest at each reset date. The TOB Residuals held by a fund provide the fund with the right to cause the holders of a proportional share of the TOB Trust Certificates to tender their certificates to the TOB Trust at par plus accrued interest. The fund may withdraw a corresponding share of the municipal bonds from the TOB Trust. Other funds managed by the investment adviser may also contribute municipal bonds to a TOB Trust into which the fund has contributed bonds. If multiple BlackRock-advised funds participate in the same TOB Trust, the economic rights and obligations under the TOB Residuals will be shared among the funds ratably in proportion to their participation in the TOB Trust.

TOB Trusts are supported by a liquidity facility provided by a third-party bank or other financial institution (the “Liquidity Provider”) that allows the holders of the TOB Trust Certificates to tender their certificates in exchange for payment of par plus accrued interest on any business day. The tendered TOB Trust Certificates are remarketed by a Remarketing Agent. In the event of a failed remarketing, the TOB Trust may draw upon a loan from the Liquidity Provider to purchase the tendered TOB Trust Certificates. Any loans made by the Liquidity Provider will be secured by the purchased TOB Trust Certificates held by the TOB Trust and will be subject to an increased interest rate based on number of days the loan is outstanding.

The TOB Trust may be collapsed without the consent of the fund, upon the occurrence of a termination event as defined in the TOB Trust agreement. Upon the occurrence of a termination event, a TOB Trust would be liquidated with the proceeds applied first to any accrued fees owed to the trustee of the TOB Trust, the Remarketing Agent and the Liquidity Provider. Upon certain termination events, TOB Trust Certificates holders will be paid before the TOB Residuals holders (i.e., the Trust) whereas in other termination events, TOB Trust Certificates holders and TOB Residuals holders will be paid pro rata.

 

 

18		2 0 2 3  B L A C K R O C K  A N N U A L  R E P O R T  T O  S H A R E H O L D E R S

---

Notes to Financial Statements (continued)

 

While the fund’s investment policies and restrictions expressly permit investments in inverse floating rate securities, such as TOB Residuals, they restrict the ability of the fund to borrow money for purposes of making investments. Each Fund’s transfer of the municipal bonds to a TOB Trust is considered a secured borrowing for financial reporting purposes. The cash received by the TOB Trust from the sale of the TOB Trust Certificates, less certain transaction expenses, is paid to the Trust. The Trust typically invests the cash received in additional municipal bonds.

Accounting for TOB Trusts: The municipal bonds deposited into a TOB Trust are presented in the Trust’s Schedule of Investments and the TOB Trust Certificates are shown in Other Liabilities in the Statement of Assets and Liabilities. Any loans drawn by the TOB Trust pursuant to the liquidity facility to purchase tendered TOB Trust Certificates are shown as Loan for TOB Trust Certificates. The carrying amount of the Trust’s payable to the holder of the TOB Trust Certificates, as reported in the Statement of Assets and Liabilities as TOB Trust Certificates, approximates its fair value.

Interest income, including amortization and accretion of premiums and discounts, from the underlying municipal bonds is recorded by the Trust on an accrual basis. Interest expense incurred on the TOB Trust transaction and other expenses related to remarketing, administration, trustee, liquidity and other services to a TOB Trust are shown as interest expense, fees and amortization of offering costs in the Statement of Operations. Fees paid upon creation of the TOB Trust are recorded as debt issuance costs and are amortized to interest expense, fees and amortization of offering costs in the Statement of Operations to the expected maturity of the TOB Trust. In connection with the restructurings of the TOB Trusts to non-bank sponsored TOB Trusts, the Trust incurred non-recurring, legal and restructuring fees, which are recorded as interest expense, fees and amortization of offering costs in the Statement of Operations. Amounts recorded within interest expense, fees and amortization of offering costs in the Statement of Operations are:

 

Trust Name			Interest Expense				Liquidity Fees				Other Expenses				Total
BMN		$	56,695			$	7,578			$	5,944			$	70,217

For the year ended December 31, 2023, the following table is a summary of the Trust’s TOB Trusts:

 

Trust Name			Underlying Municipal Bonds Transferred to TOB Trusts	(a)			Liability for TOB Trust Certificates	(b)			Range of Interest Rates on TOB Trust Certificates at Period End				Average TOB Trust Certificates Outstanding				Daily Weighted Average Rate of Interest and Other Expenses on TOB Trusts
BMN		$	20,302,065			$	12,335,000				3.90% — 4.05	%		$	2,087,041				3.37	%

 

(a)

The municipal bonds transferred to a TOB Trust are generally high grade municipal bonds. In certain cases, when municipal bonds transferred are lower grade municipal bonds, the TOB Trust transaction may include a credit enhancement feature that provides for the timely payment of principal and interest on the bonds to the TOB Trust by a credit enhancement provider in the event of default of the municipal bond. The TOB Trust would be responsible for the payment of the credit enhancement fee and the Trust, as TOB Residuals holders, would be responsible for reimbursement of any payments of principal and interest made by the credit enhancement provider. The maximum potential amounts owed by the Trust, for such reimbursements, as applicable, are included in the maximum potential amounts disclosed for recourse TOB Trusts in the Schedule of Investments.

(b)

TOB Trusts may be structured on a non-recourse or recourse basis. When a Trust invests in TOB Trusts on a non-recourse basis, the Liquidity Provider may be required to make a payment under the liquidity facility to allow the TOB Trust to repurchase TOB Trust Certificates. The Liquidity Provider will be reimbursed from the liquidation of bonds held in the TOB Trust. If the Trust invests in a TOB Trust on a recourse basis, the Trust enters into a reimbursement agreement with the Liquidity Provider where the Trust is required to reimburse the Liquidity Provider for any shortfall between the amount paid by the Liquidity Provider and proceeds received from liquidation of municipal bonds held in the TOB Trust (the “Liquidation Shortfall”). As a result, if the Trust invests in a recourse TOB Trust, the Trust will bear the risk of loss with respect to any Liquidation Shortfall. If multiple funds participate in any such TOB Trust, these losses will be shared ratably, including the maximum potential amounts owed by the Trust at December 31, 2023, in proportion to their participation in the TOB Trust. The recourse TOB Trusts are identified in the Schedule of Investments including the maximum potential amounts owed by the Trust at December 31, 2023.

 

5.	INVESTMENT ADVISORY AGREEMENT AND OTHER TRANSACTIONS WITH AFFILIATES

Investment Advisory: The Trust entered into an Investment Advisory Agreement with the Manager, the Trust’s investment adviser and an indirect, wholly-owned subsidiary of BlackRock, Inc. (“BlackRock”), to provide investment advisory and administrative services. The Manager is responsible for the management of the Trust’s portfolio and provides the personnel, facilities, equipment and certain other services necessary to the operations of the Trust.

For such services, the Trust pays the Manager a monthly fee at an annual rate equal to 0.55% of the average daily value of the Trust’s managed assets.

For purposes of calculating this fee, “managed assets” are determined as total assets of the Trust (including any assets attributable to money borrowed for investment purposes) less the sum of its accrued liabilities (other than money borrowed for investment purposes).

Expense Waivers: The Manager contractually agreed to waive its investment advisory fees by the amount of investment advisory fees the Trust pays to the Manager indirectly through its investment in affiliated money market funds (the “affiliated money market fund waiver”) through June 30, 2025. The contractual agreement may be terminated upon 90 days’ notice by a majority of the Independent Trustees, or by a vote of a majority of the outstanding voting securities of the Trust. This amount is included in fees waived and/or reimbursed by the Manager in the Statement of Operations. For the year ended December 31, 2023, the amount waived was $3,808.

The Manager contractually agreed to waive its investment advisory fee with respect to any portion of the Trust’s assets invested in affiliated equity and fixed-income mutual funds and affiliated exchange-traded funds that have a contractual management fee through June 30, 2025. The agreement can be renewed for annual periods thereafter, and may be terminated on 90 days’ notice, each subject to approval by a majority of the Trust’s Independent Trustees. For the year ended December 31, 2023, there were no fees waived by the Manager pursuant to this arrangement.

Trustees and Officers: Certain trustees and/or officers of the Trust are directors and/or officers of BlackRock or its affiliates. The Trust reimburses the Manager for a portion of the compensation paid to the Trust’s Chief Compliance Officer, which is included in Trustees and Officer in the Statement of Operations.

 

 

N O T E S  T O  F I N A N C I A L  S T A T E M E N T S		19

---

Notes to Financial Statements (continued)

 

Other Transactions: The Trust may purchase securities from, or sell securities to, an affiliated fund provided the affiliation is due solely to having a common investment adviser, common officers, or common trustees. For the year ended December 31, 2023, the purchase and sale transactions and any net realized gains (losses) with affiliated funds in compliance with Rule 17a-7 under the 1940 Act were as follows:

 

Trust Name		Purchases				Sales				Net Realized Gain (Loss)
BMN		$	—			$	9,002,188			$	—

 

6.	PURCHASES AND SALES

For the year ended December 31, 2023, purchases and sales of investments, excluding short-term securities, were $42,876,391 and $31,271,664, respectively.

 

7.	INCOME TAX INFORMATION

It is the Trust’s policy to comply with the requirements of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, applicable to regulated investment companies, and to distribute substantially all of its taxable income to its shareholders. Therefore, no U.S. federal income tax provision is required.

The Trust files U.S. federal and various state and local tax returns. No income tax returns are currently under examination. The statute of limitations on the Trust’s U.S. federal tax returns generally remains open for a period of three years after they are filed. The statutes of limitations on the Trust’s state and local tax returns may remain open for an additional year depending upon the jurisdiction.

Management has analyzed tax laws and regulations and their application to the Trust as of December 31, 2023, inclusive of the open tax return years, and does not believe that there are any uncertain tax positions that require recognition of a tax liability in the Trust’s financial statements.

The tax character of distributions paid was as follows:

 

Trust Name		Year Ended 12/31/23
BMN
Tax-exempt income		$	6,916,052
Ordinary income			13,392
		$	6,929,444

As of December 31, 2023, the tax components of accumulated earnings (loss) were as follows:

 

Trust Name		Undistributed Tax-Exempt Income				Non-Expiring Capital Loss Carryforwards(a)				Net Unrealized Gains (Losses)(b)				Total
BMN		$	125,191			$	(45,591	)		$	7,273,727			$	7,353,327

 

(a)

Amounts available to offset future realized capital gains.

(b)

The difference between book-basis and tax-basis net unrealized gains (losses) was attributable primarily to the tax deferral of losses on wash sales, amortization methods for premiums and discounts on fixed income securities and treatment of residual interests in tender option bond trusts.

As of December 31, 2023, gross unrealized appreciation and depreciation based on cost of investments (including short positions and derivatives, if any) for U.S. federal income tax purposes were as follows:

 

Trust Name		Tax Cost				Gross Unrealized Appreciation				Gross Unrealized Depreciation				Net Unrealized Appreciation (Depreciation)
BMN		$	152,209,621			$	7,363,121			$	(89,394	)		$	7,273,727

 

8.	PRINCIPAL RISKS

In the normal course of business, the Trust invests in securities or other instruments and may enter into certain transactions, and such activities subject the Trust to various risks, including among others, fluctuations in the market (market risk) or failure of an issuer to meet all of its obligations. The value of securities or other instruments may also be affected by various factors, including, without limitation: (i) the general economy; (ii) the overall market as well as local, regional or global political and/or social instability; (iii) regulation, taxation or international tax treaties between various countries; or (iv) currency, interest rate and price fluctuations. Local, regional or global events such as war, acts of terrorism, the spread of infectious illness or other public health issues, recessions, or other events could have a significant impact on the Trust and its investments.

The Trust may hold a significant amount of bonds subject to calls by the issuers at defined dates and prices. When bonds are called by issuers and the Trust reinvests the proceeds received, such investments may be in securities with lower yields than the bonds originally held, and correspondingly, could adversely impact the yield and total return performance of the Trust.

 

 

20		2 0 2 3  B L A C K R O C K  A N N U A L  R E P O R T  T O  S H A R E H O L D E R S

---

Notes to Financial Statements (continued)

 

The Trust structures and “sponsors” the TOB Trusts in which it holds TOB Residuals and has certain duties and responsibilities, which may give rise to certain additional risks including, but not limited to, compliance, securities law and operational risks.

As short-term interest rates rise, the Trust’s investments in the TOB Trusts may adversely affect the Trust’s net investment income and dividends to Common Shareholders. Also, fluctuations in the market value of municipal bonds deposited into the TOB Trust may adversely affect the Trust’s NAV per share.

The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) and various federal banking and housing agencies have adopted credit risk retention rules for securitizations (the “Risk Retention Rules”). The Risk Retention Rules would require the sponsor of a TOB Trust to retain at least 5% of the credit risk of the underlying assets supporting the TOB Trust’s municipal bonds. The Risk Retention Rules may adversely affect the Trust’s ability to engage in TOB Trust transactions or increase the costs of such transactions in certain circumstances.

TOB Trusts constitute an important component of the municipal bond market. Any modifications or changes to rules governing TOB Trusts may adversely impact the municipal market and the Trust, including through reduced demand for and liquidity of municipal bonds and increased financing costs for municipal issuers. The ultimate impact of any potential modifications on the TOB Trust market and the overall municipal market is not yet certain.

Illiquidity Risk: The Trust may invest without limitation in illiquid or less liquid investments or investments in which no secondary market is readily available or which are otherwise illiquid, including private placement securities. The Trust may not be able to readily dispose of such investments at prices that approximate those at which the Trust could sell such investments if they were more widely traded and, as a result of such illiquidity, the Trust may have to sell other investments or engage in borrowing transactions if necessary to raise funds to meet its obligations. Limited liquidity can also affect the market price of investments, thereby adversely affecting the Trust’s NAV and ability to make dividend distributions. Privately issued debt securities are often of below investment grade quality, frequently are unrated and present many of the same risks as investing in below investment grade public debt securities.

Market Risk: The Trust may be exposed to prepayment risk, which is the risk that borrowers may exercise their option to prepay principal earlier than scheduled during periods of declining interest rates, which would force the Trust to reinvest in lower yielding securities. The Trust may also be exposed to reinvestment risk, which is the risk that income from the Trust’s portfolio will decline if the Trust invests the proceeds from matured, traded or called fixed-income securities at market interest rates that are below the Trust portfolio’s current earnings rate.

Municipal securities are subject to the risk that litigation, legislation or other political events, local business or economic conditions, credit rating downgrades, or the bankruptcy of the issuer could have a significant effect on an issuer’s ability to make payments of principal and/or interest or otherwise affect the value of such securities. Municipal securities can be significantly affected by political or economic changes, including changes made in the law after issuance of the securities, as well as uncertainties in the municipal market related to, taxation, legislative changes or the rights of municipal security holders, including in connection with an issuer insolvency. Municipal securities backed by current or anticipated revenues from a specific project or specific assets can be negatively affected by the discontinuance of the tax benefits supporting the project or assets or the inability to collect revenues for the project or from the assets. Municipal securities may be less liquid than taxable bonds, and there may be less publicly available information on the financial condition of municipal security issuers than for issuers of other securities.

Investment Objective Risk: There is no assurance that BMN will achieve its investment objectives, including its investment objective of returning $25.00 per share. As BMN approaches its scheduled termination date, it is expected that the maturity of BMN’s portfolio securities will shorten, which is likely to reduce BMN’s income and distributions to shareholders.

Counterparty Credit Risk: The Trust may be exposed to counterparty credit risk, or the risk that an entity may fail to or be unable to perform on its commitments related to unsettled or open transactions, including making timely interest and/or principal payments or otherwise honoring its obligations. The Trust manages counterparty credit risk by entering into transactions only with counterparties that the Manager believes have the financial resources to honor their obligations and by monitoring the financial stability of those counterparties. Financial assets, which potentially expose the Trust to market, issuer and counterparty credit risks, consist principally of financial instruments and receivables due from counterparties. The extent of the Trust’s exposure to market, issuer and counterparty credit risks with respect to these financial assets is approximately their value recorded in the Statement of Assets and Liabilities, less any collateral held by the Trust.

Geographic/Asset Class Risk: A diversified portfolio, where this is appropriate and consistent with a fund’s objectives, minimizes the risk that a price change of a particular investment will have a material impact on the NAV of a fund. The investment concentrations within the Trust’s portfolio are disclosed in its Schedule of Investments.

The Trust invests a significant portion of its assets in securities within a single or limited number of market sectors. When a fund concentrates its investments in this manner, it assumes the risk that economic, regulatory, political and social conditions affecting such sectors may have a significant impact on the Trust and could affect the income from, or the value or liquidity of, the Trust’s portfolio. Investment percentages in specific sectors are presented in the Schedule of Investments.

The Trust invests a significant portion of its assets in high yield securities. High yield securities that are rated below investment-grade (commonly referred to as “junk bonds”) or are unrated may be deemed speculative, involve greater levels of risk than higher-rated securities of similar maturity and are more likely to default. High yield securities may be issued by less creditworthy issuers, and issuers of high yield securities may be unable to meet their interest or principal payment obligations. High yield securities are subject to extreme price fluctuations, may be less liquid than higher rated fixed-income securities, even under normal economic conditions, and frequently have redemption features.

The Trust invests a significant portion of its assets in fixed-income securities and/or uses derivatives tied to the fixed-income markets. Changes in market interest rates or economic conditions may affect the value and/or liquidity of such investments. Interest rate risk is the risk that prices of bonds and other fixed-income securities will decrease as interest rates rise and increase as interest rates fall. The Trust may be subject to a greater risk of rising interest rates due to the period of historically low interest rates that ended in March 2022. The Federal Reserve has recently been raising the federal funds rate as part of its efforts to address inflation. There is a risk that interest rates will continue to rise, which will likely drive down the prices of bonds and other fixed-income securities, and could negatively impact the Trust’s performance.

 

 

N O T E S  T O  F I N A N C I A L  S T A T E M E N T S		21

---

Notes to Financial Statements (continued)

 

The Trust invests a significant portion of its assets in securities of issuers located in the United States. A decrease in imports or exports, changes in trade regulations, inflation and/or an economic recession in the United States may have a material adverse effect on the U.S. economy and the securities listed on U.S. exchanges. Proposed and adopted policy and legislative changes in the United States may also have a significant effect on U.S. markets generally, as well as on the value of certain securities. Governmental agencies project that the United States will continue to maintain elevated public debt levels for the foreseeable future which may constrain future economic growth. Circumstances could arise that could prevent the timely payment of interest or principal on U.S. government debt, such as reaching the legislative “debt ceiling.” Such non-payment would result in substantial negative consequences for the U.S. economy and the global financial system. If U.S. relations with certain countries deteriorate, it could adversely affect issuers that rely on the United States for trade. The United States has also experienced increased internal unrest and discord. If these trends were to continue, they may have an adverse impact on the U.S. economy and the issuers in which the Trust invests.

9. CAPITAL SHARE TRANSACTIONS

The Trust is authorized to issue an unlimited number of shares, all of which were initially classified as Common Shares. The Board is authorized, however, to reclassify any unissued Common Shares to Preferred Shares without the approval of Common Shareholders.

For the period October 28, 2022 to December 31, 2022, shares issued and outstanding increased by 5,380,000 from the initial public offering and 763,653 from the underwriters’ exercising the over-allotment option.

For the year ended December 31, 2023, shares issued and outstanding remained constant.

As of December 31, 2023, BlackRock Financial Management, Inc., an affiliate of the Trust, owned 4,000 shares of BMN.

10. SUBSEQUENT EVENTS

Management’s evaluation of the impact of all subsequent events on the Trust’s financial statements was completed through the date the financial statements were issued and the following items were noted:

The Trust declared and paid or will pay distributions to Common Shareholders as follows:

 

Trust Name

Declaration Date

Record Date

Payable/ Paid Date

Dividend Per Common Share

BMN

11/14/23

01/12/24

02/01/24

$

0.093750

11/14/23

02/15/24

03/01/24

0.093750

 

 

22		2 0 2 3  B L A C K R O C K  A N N U A L  R E P O R T  T O  S H A R E H O L D E R S

---

Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

 

To the Shareholders and the Board of Trustees of BlackRock 2037 Municipal Target Term Trust:

Opinion on the Financial Statements and Financial Highlights

We have audited the accompanying statement of assets and liabilities of BlackRock 2037 Municipal Target Term Trust (the “Fund”), including the schedule of investments, as of December 31, 2023, the related statement of operations for the year then ended, the statements of changes in net assets and the financial highlights for the year then ended and for the period from October 28, 2022 (commencement of operations) through December 31, 2022, and the related notes. In our opinion, the financial statements and financial highlights present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of the Fund as of December 31, 2023, the results of its operations for the year then ended, and the changes in its net assets and the financial highlights for the year then ended and for the period from October 28, 2022 (commencement of operations) through December 31, 2022, in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.

Basis for Opinion

These financial statements and financial highlights are the responsibility of the Fund’s management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on the Fund’s financial statements and financial highlights based on our audits. We are a public accounting firm registered with the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States) (PCAOB) and are required to be independent with respect to the Fund in accordance with the U.S. federal securities laws and the applicable rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission and the PCAOB.

We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the PCAOB. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements and financial highlights are free of material misstatement, whether due to error or fraud. The Fund is not required to have, nor were we engaged to perform, an audit of its internal control over financial reporting. As part of our audits we are required to obtain an understanding of internal control over financial reporting but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the Fund’s internal control over financial reporting. Accordingly, we express no such opinion.

Our audits included performing procedures to assess the risks of material misstatement of the financial statements and financial highlights, whether due to error or fraud, and performing procedures that respond to those risks. Such procedures included examining, on a test basis, evidence regarding the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements and financial highlights. Our audits also included evaluating the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall presentation of the financial statements and financial highlights. Our procedures included confirmation of securities owned as of December 31, 2023, by correspondence with custodians or counterparties; when replies were not received, we performed other auditing procedures. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.

Deloitte & Touche LLP

Boston, Massachusetts

February 23, 2024

We have served as the auditor of one or more BlackRock investment companies since 1992.

 

 

R E P O R T  O F  I N D E P E N D E N T  R E G I S T E R E D  P U B L I C  A C C O U N T I N G  F I R M		23

---

Important Tax Information  (unaudited)

 

The following amount, or maximum amount allowable by law, is hereby designated as tax-exempt interest dividends for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2023:

 

Trust Name		Exempt-Interest Dividends
BMN		$	6,414,750

The Trust hereby designates the following amount, or maximum amount allowable by law, as interest income eligible to be treated as a Section 163(j) interest dividend for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2023:

 

Trust Name		Interest Dividends
BMN		$	59

The Trust hereby designates the following amount, or maximum amount allowable by law, as interest-related dividends and qualified short-term capital gains eligible for exemption from U.S. withholding tax for nonresident aliens and foreign corporations for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2023:

 

Trust Name		Interest- Related Dividends				Qualified Short-Term Capital Gains
BMN		$	59			$	13,333

 

 

24		2 0 2 3  B L A C K R O C K  A N N U A L  R E P O R T  T O  S H A R E H O L D E R S

---

Investment Objectives, Policies and Risks

 

Recent Changes

The following information is a summary of certain changes since December 31, 2022. This information may not reflect all of the changes that have occurred since you purchased the Trust.

During the Trust’s most recent fiscal year, there were no material changes in the Trust’s investment objectives or policies that have not been approved by shareholders or in the principal risk factors associated with investment in the Trust.

Investment Objectives and Policies

The Trust’s investment objectives are to provide current income that is exempt from federal income tax (but which may be subject to the federal alternative minimum tax in certain circumstances) and to return $25.00 per common share (the initial public offering price per common share) to holders of common shares on or about September 30, 2037. There can be no assurance that the Trust’s investment objectives, including to return $25.00 per common share to the holders of common shares on or about September 30, 2037, will be achieved or that the Trust’s investment program will be successful. The Trust’s investment objectives may be changed by the Trust’s Board of Trustees (the “Board”) without prior shareholder approval.

Under normal market conditions, the Trust will invest at least 80% of its Managed Assets in municipal securities. The Trust invests primarily in investment grade quality securities, which are securities that are rated, at the time of investment, within the four highest grades (Baa or BBB or better by Moody’s Investor’s Service Inc. (“Moody’s”), S&P Global Ratings (“S&P”) or Fitch Ratings, Inc. (“Fitch”)) or securities that are unrated but judged to be of comparable quality by BlackRock Advisors, LLC (the “Manager”). Split rated municipal securities (securities that receive different ratings from two or more rating agencies) will be considered to have the higher credit rating. Municipal securities rated Baa by Moody’s are investment grade, but Moody’s considers municipal securities rated Baa to have speculative characteristics. Changes in economic conditions or other circumstances are more likely to lead to a weakened capacity for issuers of municipal securities that are rated BBB or Baa (or that have equivalent ratings) to make principal and interest payments than is the case for issuers of higher grade municipal securities. In the case of short term notes, the investment grade rating categories are SP-1+ through SP-2 for S&P, MIG-1 through MIG-3 for Moody’s and F-1+ through F-3 for Fitch. In the case of tax-exempt commercial paper, the investment grade rating categories are A-1+ through A-3 for S&P, Prime-1 through Prime-3 for Moody’s and F-1+ through F-3 for Fitch. Obligations ranked in the lowest investment grade rating category (BBB, SP-2 and A-3 for S&P; Baa, MIG-3 and Prime-3 for Moody’s and BBB and F-3 for Fitch), while considered “investment grade,” may have certain speculative characteristics. There may be sub-categories or gradations indicating relative standing within the rating categories set forth above. In assessing the quality of municipal securities with respect to the foregoing requirements, the Manager takes into account the nature of any letters of credit or similar credit enhancement to which particular municipal securities are entitled and the creditworthiness of the financial institution that provided such credit enhancement.

The Trust may invest up to 35% of its Managed Assets in municipal securities that are rated, at the time of investment, below investment grade quality (rated Ba/BB or below by Moody’s, S&P or Fitch) or securities that are unrated but judged to be of comparable quality by the Manager. However, under no circumstances will the Trust invest more than 25% of its Managed Assets in any securities, including municipal securities or any other securities, rated Caa/CCC or below by Moody’s, S&P or Fitch (or, if unrated, determined to be of a comparable credit quality by the Manager). Securities of below investment grade quality, sometimes referred to as “high yield” or “junk” bonds, are predominantly speculative with respect to the capacity to pay interest and repay principal in accordance with the terms of the security and generally involve a greater volatility of price than securities in higher rating categories.

The Trust may invest 25% or more of its Managed Assets in municipal securities of issuers in the same state (or U.S. Territory) or in the same economic sector.

The foregoing credit quality policies apply only at the time a security is purchased, and the Trust is not required to dispose of a security if a rating agency downgrades its assessment of the credit characteristics of a particular issue. In determining whether to retain or sell a security that a rating agency has downgraded, the Manager may consider such factors as the Manager’s assessment of the credit quality of the issuer of the security, the price at which the security could be sold and the rating, if any, assigned to the security by other rating agencies. In the event that the Trust disposes of a portfolio security subsequent to its being downgraded, the Trust may experience a greater risk of loss than if such security had been sold prior to such downgrade.

The Trust may also invest up to 10% of its total assets in securities of other investment companies, including open- or closed-end investment companies that invest primarily in municipal securities of the types in which the Trust may invest directly and in tax-exempt preferred shares that pay dividends exempt from regular federal income tax. Additionally, the Trust may purchase municipal securities that are secured by insurance, bank credit agreements or escrow accounts. The credit quality of companies which provide these credit enhancements will affect the value of those securities. Although the insurance feature reduces certain financial risks, the premiums for insurance and the higher market price paid for insured obligations may reduce the Trust’s income. The insurance feature does not guarantee the market value of the insured obligations or the net asset value of the common shares. The Trust may purchase insured municipal securities and may purchase insurance for municipal securities in its portfolio.

The Trust may invest without limit in certain tax-exempt securities classified as “private activity bonds” (or industrial development bonds, under pre-1986 law) (in general, bonds that benefit non-governmental entities) that may subject certain investors in the Trust to the federal alternative minimum tax. The percentage of the Trust’s Managed Assets invested in private activity bonds will vary from time to time. The Trust has not established any limit on the percentage of its portfolio that may be invested in municipal securities subject to the alternative minimum tax provisions of federal tax law, and the Trust expects that a portion of the income it produces will be includable in alternative minimum taxable income. Common shares therefore would not ordinarily be a suitable investment for investors who are subject to the federal alternative minimum tax or who would become subject to such tax by purchasing common shares. The suitability of an investment in our common shares will depend upon a comparison of the after-tax yield likely to be provided from the Trust with that from comparable tax- exempt investments not subject to the alternative minimum tax, and from comparable fully taxable investments, in light of each such investor’s tax position.

The Trust seeks to return $25.00 per common share to holders of common shares on or about September 30, 2037 (when the Trust will terminate unless (i) a majority of the Trust’s Board and 75% of the outstanding shares of the Trust approve an amendment to the Trust’s Amended and Restated Agreement and Declaration of Trust to extend the Trust’s termination date or (ii) 80% of the Trust’s Board approves an earlier termination date) by actively managing its portfolio of municipal obligations, which will have an average final maturity on or about such date, and by retaining each year a percentage of its net investment income, but continuing to maintain its status as a regulated

 

 

I N V E S T M E N T  O B J E C T I V E S ,  P O L I C I E S  A N D  R I S K S		25

---

Investment Objectives, Policies and Risks (continued)

 

investment company for federal income tax purposes. The purpose of retaining a portion of the net investment income is to enhance the Trust’s ability to return to investors $25.00 per common share outstanding upon the Trust’s termination. Such retained net investment income will generally serve to increase the net asset value of the Trust. However, if the Trust realizes any capital losses on dispositions of securities that are not offset by capital gains on the disposition of other securities, the Trust may return less than $25.00 for each common share outstanding at the end of the Trust’s term. In addition, the leverage used by the Trust may increase the possibility of incurring capital losses and the difficulty of subsequently incurring capital gains to offset such losses. However, the Manager believes that it will be able to manage the Trust’s assets so that the Trust will not realize capital losses which are not offset by capital gains over the life of the Trust on the disposition of its other assets and retained net investment income. Although neither the Manager nor the Trust can guarantee these results, their achievement should enable the Trust, on or about September 30, 2037, to have available for distribution to holders of its common shares $25.00 (or more) for each common share then outstanding. There is no assurance that the Trust will be able to achieve its investment objective of returning $25.00 per common share to holders of common shares on or about September 30, 2037.

After the initial investment period, the Trust intends to actively manage the maturity of its securities, which are expected to have a dollar weighted average effective maturity approximately equal to the Trust’s maturity date of or about September 30, 2037. As a result, over time the maturity of the Trust’s portfolio is expected to shorten in relation to the remaining term of the Trust.

Federal tax legislation has limited the types and volume of bonds the interest on which qualifies for a federal income tax exemption. As a result, this legislation and legislation that may be enacted in the future may affect the availability of municipal securities for investment by the Trust. The Trust does not intend to invest in municipal securities the income from which is subject to regular federal income tax; however, to the extent that the Trust does invest in such securities, a portion of your dividends would be subject to regular federal income tax. The Trust ordinarily does not intend to realize significant investment income not exempt from regular federal income tax. From time to time, the Trust may realize taxable capital gains.

During temporary defensive periods, including the period during which the net proceeds of this offering are being invested, and in order to keep the Trust’s cash fully invested, the Trust may invest up to 100% of its total assets in liquid, short-term investments, including high quality, short-term securities that may be either tax-exempt or taxable. The Trust may not achieve its investment objectives under these circumstances. The Trust intends to invest in taxable short-term investments only if suitable tax-exempt short-term investments are not available at reasonable prices and yields. If the Trust invests in taxable short-term investments, a portion of your dividends would be subject to regular federal income tax.

Leverage: The Trust may use leverage to seek to achieve its investment objectives. The Trust’s use of leverage may increase or decrease from time to time in its discretion and the Trust may, in the future, determine not to use leverage. The Trust may utilize leverage for investment purposes by investing in residual interest municipal tender option bonds (“TOB Residuals”), which are derivative interests in municipal bonds, in an amount up to 33 1/3% of its Managed Assets (50% of its net assets). In addition, the Trust may utilize leverage for investment purposes through the issuance of preferred shares, subject to market conditions being conducive to the successful implementation of a leveraging strategy through the issuance of preferred shares.

Although it has no present intention to do so, the Trust reserves the right to borrow money from banks or other financial institutions, or issue debt securities in the future if it believes that market conditions would be conducive to the successful implementation of a leveraging strategy through borrowing money or issuing debt securities.

The Trust may enter into derivative transactions that have leverage embedded in them.

The Trust may also borrow money as a temporary measure for extraordinary or emergency purposes, including the payment of dividends and the settlement of securities transactions which otherwise might require untimely dispositions of Trust securities.

Under normal market conditions, the Trust’s use of leverage, subject to the limitations set forth in the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended (the “Investment Company Act”), from any combination of (i) borrowings (including by investing in TOB Residuals) or the issuance of debt securities, (ii) the issuance of preferred shares, and (iii) derivative instruments with embedded leverage for investment purposes, will not exceed 50% of the Trust’s Managed Assets (100% of its net assets) (the “50% Policy”). The Trust’s use of derivative instruments with embedded leverage for hedging purposes will not be subject to the 50% Policy.

Risk Factors

This section contains a discussion of the general risks of investing in the Trust. The net asset value and market price of, and dividends paid on, the common shares will fluctuate with and be affected by, among other things, the risks more fully described below. As with any fund, there can be no guarantee that the Trust will meet its investment objective or that the Trust’s performance will be positive for any period of time. The order of the below risk factors does not indicate the significance of any particular risk factor.

Investment and Market Discount Risk: An investment in the Trust’s common shares is subject to investment risk, including the possible loss of the entire amount that you invest. As with any stock, the price of the Trust’s common shares will fluctuate with market conditions and other factors. If shares are sold, the price received may be more or less than the original investment. Common shares are designed for long-term investors and the Trust should not be treated as a trading vehicle. Shares of closed-end management investment companies frequently trade at a discount from their net asset value. This risk is separate and distinct from the risk that the Trust’s net asset value could decrease as a result of its investment activities. At any point in time an investment in the Trust’s common shares may be worth less than the original amount invested, even after taking into account distributions paid by the Trust. During periods in which the Trust may use leverage, the Trust’s investment, market discount and certain other risks will be magnified.

Limited Term Risk: The Trust will terminate on or about September 30, 2037 in accordance with the terms of its Amended and Restated Agreement and Declaration of Trust, unless (i) a majority of the Trust’s Board and 75% of the outstanding shares of the Trust approve an amendment to the Trust’s Amended and Restated Agreement and Declaration of Trust to extend the Trust’s termination date or (ii) 80% of the Trust’s Board approves an earlier termination date. The Trust seeks to return $25.00 per common share (the initial public offering price per common share) to holders of common shares on or about September 30, 2037. The Trust’s limited term may cause it to sell securities when it otherwise would not, which could cause the Trust’s returns to decrease and the market price and/or net asset value of the common shares to fall. As the Trust approaches its termination date, the Manager may need to reinvest the proceeds from sold, matured or called securities into securities with shorter maturity dates and lower yields, or hold the proceeds in cash or cash equivalents, which may adversely affect the performance of the Trust or the Trust’s ability to maintain its dividend.

 

 

26		2 0 2 3  B L A C K R O C K  A N N U A L  R E P O R T  T O  S H A R E H O L D E R S

---

Investment Objectives, Policies and Risks (continued)

 

Non-Diversification Risk: The Trust is a non-diversified fund. Because the Trust may invest in securities of a smaller number of issuers, it may be more exposed to the risks associated with and developments affecting an individual issuer than a fund that invests more widely.

Debt Securities Risk: Debt securities, such as bonds, involve interest rate risk, such as credit risk, interest rate risk, extension risk, and prepayment risk, each of which are described in further detail below:

 

·

Credit Risk – Credit risk refers to the possibility that the issuer of a debt security (i.e., the borrower) will not be able to make payments of interest and principal when due. Changes in an issuer’s credit rating or the market’s perception of an issuer’s creditworthiness may also affect the value of the Trust’s investment in that issuer. The degree of credit risk depends on both the financial condition of the issuer and the terms of the obligation.

 

·

Interest Rate Risk – The market value of bonds and other fixed-income securities changes in response to interest rate changes and other factors. Interest rate risk is the risk that prices of bonds and other fixed-income securities will increase as interest rates fall and decrease as interest rates rise.

The Trust may be subject to a greater risk of rising interest rates due to the recent period of historically low interest rates. For example, if interest rates increase by 1%, assuming a current portfolio duration of ten years, and all other factors being equal, the value of the Trust’s investments would be expected to decrease by 10%. (Duration is a measure of the price sensitivity of a debt security or portfolio of debt securities to relative changes in interest rates.) The magnitude of these fluctuations in the market price of bonds and other fixed-income securities is generally greater for those securities with longer maturities. Fluctuations in the market price of the Trust’s investments will not affect interest income derived from instruments already owned by the Trust, but will be reflected in the Trust’s net asset value. The Trust may lose money if short-term or long-term interest rates rise sharply in a manner not anticipated by Trust management.

To the extent the Trust invests in debt securities that may be prepaid at the option of the obligor (such as mortgage-backed securities), the sensitivity of such securities to changes in interest rates may increase (to the detriment of the Trust) when interest rates rise. Moreover, because rates on certain floating rate debt securities typically reset only periodically, changes in prevailing interest rates (and particularly sudden and significant changes) can be expected to cause some fluctuations in the net asset value of the Trust to the extent that it invests in floating rate debt securities.

These basic principles of bond prices also apply to U.S. Government securities. A security backed by the “full faith and credit” of the U.S. Government is guaranteed only as to its stated interest rate and face value at maturity, not its current market price. Just like other fixed-income securities, government-guaranteed securities will fluctuate in value when interest rates change.

A general rise in interest rates has the potential to cause investors to move out of fixed-income securities on a large scale, which may increase redemptions from funds that hold large amounts of fixed-income securities. Heavy redemptions could cause the Trust to sell assets at inopportune times or at a loss or depressed value and could hurt the Trust’s performance.

 

·

Extension Risk – When interest rates rise, certain obligations will be paid off by the obligor more slowly than anticipated, causing the value of these obligations to fall.

 

·

Prepayment Risk – When interest rates fall, certain obligations will be paid off by the obligor more quickly than originally anticipated, and the Trust may have to invest the proceeds in securities with lower yields.

Municipal Securities Risks: Municipal securities risks include the ability of the issuer to repay the obligation, the relative lack of information about certain issuers of municipal securities, and the possibility of future legislative changes which could affect the market for and value of municipal securities. Budgetary constraints of local, state, and federal governments upon which the issuers may be relying for funding may also impact municipal securities. These risks include:

 

·

General Obligation Bonds Risks – Timely payments depend on the issuer’s credit quality, ability to raise tax revenues and ability to maintain an adequate tax base.

 

·

Revenue Bonds Risks – These payments depend on the money earned by the particular facility or class of facilities, or the amount of revenues derived from another source.

 

·

Private Activity Bonds Risks – Municipalities and other public authorities issue private activity bonds to finance development of industrial facilities for use by a private enterprise. The private enterprise pays the principal and interest on the bond, and the issuer does not pledge its full faith, credit and taxing power for repayment. The Trust’s investments may consist of private activity bonds that may subject certain shareholders to an alternative minimum tax.

 

·

Moral Obligation Bonds Risks – Moral obligation bonds are generally issued by special purpose public authorities of a state or municipality. If the issuer is unable to meet its obligations, repayment of these bonds becomes a moral commitment, but not a legal obligation, of the state or municipality.

 

·

Municipal Notes Risks – Municipal notes are shorter term municipal debt obligations. If there is a shortfall in the anticipated proceeds, the notes may not be fully repaid and the Trust may lose money.

 

·

Municipal Lease Obligations Risks – In a municipal lease obligation, the issuer agrees to make payments when due on the lease obligation. Although the issuer does not pledge its unlimited taxing power for payment of the lease obligation, the lease obligation is secured by the leased property.

 

 

I N V E S T M E N T  O B J E C T I V E S ,  P O L I C I E S  A N D  R I S K S		27

---

Investment Objectives, Policies and Risks (continued)

 

·

Tax-Exempt Status Risk – The Trust and its investment manager will rely on the opinion of issuers’ bond counsel and, in the case of derivative securities, sponsors’ counsel, on the tax-exempt status of interest on municipal bonds and payments under derivative securities. Neither the Trust nor its investment manager will independently review the bases for those tax opinions, which may ultimately be determined to be incorrect and subject the Trust and its shareholders to substantial tax liabilities.

Taxability Risk: The Trust intends to minimize the payment of taxable income to shareholders by investing in tax-exempt or municipal securities in reliance at the time of purchase on an opinion of bond counsel to the issuer that the interest paid on those securities will be excludable from gross income for U.S. federal income tax purposes. Such securities, however, may be determined to pay, or have paid, taxable income subsequent to the Trust’s acquisition of the securities. In that event, the treatment of dividends previously paid or to be paid by the Trust as “exempt interest dividends” could be adversely affected, subjecting the Trust’s shareholders to increased U.S. federal income tax liabilities. Alternatively, the Trust might enter into an agreement with the IRS to pay an agreed upon amount in lieu of the IRS adjusting individual shareholders’ income tax liabilities. If the Trust agrees to enter into such an agreement, the Trust’s yield could be adversely affected. Further, shareholders at the time the Trust enters into such an agreement that were not shareholders when the dividends in question were paid would bear some cost for a benefit they did not receive. Federal tax legislation may limit the types and volume of bonds the interest on which qualifies for a federal income tax-exemption. As a result, current legislation and legislation that may be enacted in the future may affect the availability of municipal securities for investment by the Trust. In addition, future laws, regulations, rulings or court decisions may cause interest on municipal securities to be subject, directly or indirectly, to U.S. federal income taxation or interest on state municipal securities to be subject to state or local income taxation, or the value of state municipal securities to be subject to state or local intangible personal property tax, or may otherwise prevent the Trust from realizing the full current benefit of the tax-exempt status of such securities. Any such change could also affect the market price of such securities, and thus the value of an investment in the Trust.

Insurance Risk: Insurance guarantees that interest payments on a municipal security will be made on time and that the principal will be repaid when the security matures. However, insurance does not protect against losses caused by declines in a municipal security’s value. The Trust cannot be certain that any insurance company will make the payments it guarantees. If a municipal security’s insurer fails to fulfill its obligations or loses its credit rating, the value of the security could drop.

High Yield Bonds Risk: Although junk bonds generally pay higher rates of interest than investment grade bonds, junk bonds are high risk investments that are considered speculative and may cause income and principal losses for the Trust.

Economic Sector and Geographic Risk: The Trust may invest 25% or more of its Managed Assets in municipal securities of issuers in the same state (or U.S. Territory) or in the same economic sector. If the Trust does so, this may make it more susceptible to adverse economic, political or regulatory occurrences affecting a particular state or economic sector. As concentration increases, so does the potential for fluctuation in the net asset value of the Trust’s common shares.

Leverage Risk: The use of leverage creates an opportunity for increased common share net investment income dividends, but also creates risks for the holders of common shares.

The Trust cannot assure you that the intended use of leverage will result in a higher yield on the common shares. There can be no assurance that the Trust’s intended leveraging strategy will be successful. The Trust’s use of leverage may increase or decrease from time to time in its discretion and the Trust may, in the future, determine not to use leverage.

The use of leverage creates an opportunity for increased common share net investment income dividends, but also creates risks for the holders of common shares. The Trust cannot assure you that the use of leverage will result in a higher yield on the common shares. Any leveraging strategy the Trust employs may not be successful.

Leverage involves risks and special considerations for common shareholders, including:

 

·

the likelihood of greater volatility of net asset value, market price and dividend rate of the common shares than a comparable portfolio without leverage;

 

·

the risk that fluctuations in interest rates or dividend rates on any leverage that the Trust must pay will reduce the return to the common shareholders;

 

·

the effect of leverage in a declining market, which is likely to cause a greater decline in the net asset value of the common shares than if the Trust were not leveraged, which may result in a greater decline in the market price of the common shares;

 

·

leverage may increase operating costs, which may reduce total return.

Any decline in the net asset value of the Trust’s investments will be borne entirely by the holders of common shares. Therefore, if the market value of the Trust’s portfolio declines, leverage will result in a greater decrease in net asset value to the holders of common shares than if the Trust were not leveraged. This greater net asset value decrease will also tend to cause a greater decline in the market price for the common shares.

Tender Option Bonds Risk: The Trust’s participation in tender option bond transactions may reduce the Trust’s returns and/or increase volatility. Investments in tender option bond transactions expose the Trust to counterparty risk and leverage risk. An investment in a tender option bond transaction typically will involve greater risk than an investment in a municipal fixed rate security, including the risk of loss of principal. Distributions on TOB Residuals will bear an inverse relationship to short-term municipal security interest rates. Distributions on TOB Residuals paid to the Trust will be reduced or, in the extreme, eliminated as short-term municipal interest rates rise and will increase when short-term municipal interest rates fall. TOB Residuals generally will underperform the market for fixed rate municipal securities in a rising interest rate environment. The Trust may invest in special purpose trusts formed for the purpose of holding municipal bonds contributed by one or more funds (“TOB Trusts”) on either a non-recourse or recourse basis. If the Trust invests in a TOB Trust on a recourse basis, it could suffer losses in excess of the value of its TOB Residuals.

Illiquid Investments Risk: The Trust may invest without limitation in illiquid or less liquid investments or investments in which no secondary market is readily available or which are otherwise illiquid, including private placement securities. The Trust may not be able to readily dispose of such investments at prices that approximate those at which the Trust could sell such investments if they were more widely traded and, as a result of such illiquidity, the Trust may have to sell other investments or engage in borrowing

 

 

28		2 0 2 3  B L A C K R O C K  A N N U A L  R E P O R T  T O  S H A R E H O L D E R S

---

Investment Objectives, Policies and Risks (continued)

 

transactions if necessary to raise cash to meet its obligations. Limited liquidity can also affect the market price of investments, thereby adversely affecting the Trust’s net asset value and ability to make dividend distributions. The financial markets in general, and certain segments of the mortgage-related securities markets in particular, have in recent years experienced periods of extreme secondary market supply and demand imbalance, resulting in a loss of liquidity during which market prices were suddenly and substantially below traditional measures of intrinsic value. During such periods, some investments could be sold only at arbitrary prices and with substantial losses. Periods of such market dislocation may occur again at any time. Privately issued debt securities are often of below investment grade quality, frequently are unrated and present many of the same risks as investing in below investment grade public debt securities.

Investment Companies and ETFs Risk: Subject to the limitations set forth in the Investment Company Act and the rules thereunder, the Trust may acquire shares in other investment companies and in exchange-traded funds (“ETFs”), some of which may be affiliated investment companies. The market value of the shares of other investment companies and ETFs may differ from their net asset value. As an investor in investment companies and ETFs, the Trust would bear its ratable share of that entity’s expenses, including its investment advisory and administration fees, while continuing to pay its own advisory and administration fees and other expenses (to the extent not offset by the Manager through waivers). As a result, shareholders will be absorbing duplicate levels of fees with respect to investments in other investment companies and ETFs (to the extent not offset by the Manager through waivers).

The securities of other investment companies and ETFs in which the Trust may invest may be leveraged. As a result, the Trust may be indirectly exposed to leverage through an investment in such securities. An investment in securities of other investment companies and ETFs that use leverage may expose the Trust to higher volatility in the market value of such securities and the possibility that the Trust’s long-term returns on such securities (and, indirectly, the long-term returns of shares of the Trust) will be diminished.

As with other investments, investments in other investment companies, including ETFs, are subject to market and selection risk. To the extent the Trust is held by an affiliated fund, the ability of the Trust itself to hold other investment companies may be limited.

Derivatives Risk: The Trust’s use of derivatives may increase its costs, reduce the Trust’s returns and/or increase volatility. Derivatives involve significant risks, including:

 

·

Leverage Risk – The Trust’s use of derivatives can magnify the Trust’s gains and losses. Relatively small market movements may result in large changes in the value of a derivatives position and can result in losses that greatly exceed the amount originally invested.

 

·

Market Risk – Some derivatives are more sensitive to interest rate changes and market price fluctuations than other securities. The Trust could also suffer losses related to its derivatives positions as a result of unanticipated market movements, which losses are potentially unlimited. Finally, the Manager may not be able to predict correctly the direction of securities prices, interest rates and other economic factors, which could cause the Trust’s derivatives positions to lose value.

 

·

Counterparty Risk – Derivatives are also subject to counterparty risk, which is the risk that the other party in the transaction will be unable or unwilling to fulfill its contractual obligation, and the related risks of having concentrated exposure to such a counterparty.

 

·

Illiquidity Risk – The possible lack of a liquid secondary market for derivatives and the resulting inability of the Trust to sell or otherwise close a derivatives position could expose the Trust to losses and could make derivatives more difficult for the Trust to value accurately.

 

·

Operational Risk – The use of derivatives includes the risk of potential operational issues, including documentation issues, settlement issues, systems failures, inadequate controls and human error.

 

·

Legal Risk – The risk of insufficient documentation, insufficient capacity or authority of counterparty, or legality or enforceability of a contract.

 

·

Volatility and Correlation Risk – Volatility is defined as the characteristic of a security, an index or a market to fluctuate significantly in price within a short time period. A risk of the Trust’s use of derivatives is that the fluctuations in their values may not correlate with the overall securities markets.

 

·

Valuation Risk – Valuation for derivatives may not be readily available in the market. Valuation may be more difficult in times of market turmoil since many investors and market makers may be reluctant to purchase complex instruments or quote prices for them.

 

·

Hedging Risk – Hedges are sometimes subject to imperfect matching between the derivative and the underlying security, and there can be no assurance that the Trust’s hedging transactions will be effective. The use of hedging may result in certain adverse tax consequences.

 

·

Tax Risk – Certain aspects of the tax treatment of derivative instruments, including swap agreements and commodity-linked derivative instruments, are currently unclear and may be affected by changes in legislation, regulations or other legally binding authority. Such treatment may be less favorable than that given to a direct investment in an underlying asset and may adversely affect the timing, character and amount of income the Trust realizes from its investments.

Risk of Investing in the United States: Certain changes in the U.S. economy, such as when the U.S. economy weakens or when its financial markets decline, may have an adverse effect on the securities to which the Trust has exposure.

Market Risk and Selection Risk: Market risk is the risk that one or more markets in which the Trust invests will go down in value, including the possibility that the markets will go down sharply and unpredictably. The value of a security or other asset may decline due to changes in general market conditions, economic trends or events that are not specifically related to the issuer of the security or other asset, or factors that affect a particular issuer or issuers, exchange, country, group of countries, region, market, industry, group of industries, sector or asset class. Local, regional or global events such as war, acts of terrorism, the spread of infectious illness or other public health issues like pandemics or epidemics, recessions, or other events could have a significant impact on the Trust and its investments. Selection risk is the risk that the securities selected by Trust management will underperform the markets, the relevant indices or the securities selected by other funds with similar investment objectives and investment strategies. This means you may lose money.

 

 

I N V E S T M E N T  O B J E C T I V E S ,  P O L I C I E S  A N D  R I S K S		29

---

Investment Objectives, Policies and Risks (continued)

 

An outbreak of an infectious coronavirus (COVID-19) that was first detected in December 2019 developed into a global pandemic that has resulted in numerous disruptions in the market and has had significant economic impact leaving general concern and uncertainty. Although vaccines have been developed and approved for use by various governments, the duration of the pandemic and its effects cannot be predicted with certainty. The impact of this coronavirus, and other epidemics and pandemics that may arise in the future, could affect the economies of many nations, individual companies and the market in general ways that cannot necessarily be foreseen at the present time.

Shareholder Activism Risk: Shareholder activism involving closed-end funds has recently been increasing. Shareholder activism can take many forms, including engaging in public campaigns to demand that the Trust consider significant transactions such as a tender offer, merger or liquidation or to attempt to influence the Trust’s corporate governance and/or management, commencing proxy contests to attempt to elect the activists’ representatives or others to the Trust’s Board of Trustees, or to seek other actions such as a termination of the Trust’s investment advisory contract with its current investment manager or commencing litigation. If the Trust becomes the subject of shareholder activism, then management and the Board may be required to divert significant resources and attention to respond to the activist and the Fund may incur substantial costs defending against such activism if management and the Board determine that the activist’s demands are not in the best interest of the Trust. Further, the Trust’s share price could be subject to significant fluctuation or otherwise be adversely affected by the events, risks and uncertainties of any shareholder activism.

 

 

30		2 0 2 3  B L A C K R O C K  A N N U A L  R E P O R T  T O  S H A R E H O L D E R S

---

Automatic Dividend Reinvestment Plan

 

Pursuant to BMN’s Dividend Reinvestment Plan (the “Reinvestment Plan”), Common Shareholders are automatically enrolled to have all distributions of dividends and capital gains and other distributions reinvested by Computershare Trust Company, N.A. (the “Reinvestment Plan Agent”) in the Trust’s Common Shares pursuant to the Reinvestment Plan. Shareholders who do not participate in the Reinvestment Plan will receive all distributions in cash paid by check and mailed directly to the shareholders of record (or if the shares are held in street name or other nominee name, then to the nominee) by the Reinvestment Plan Agent, which serves as agent for the shareholders in administering the Reinvestment Plan.

After BMN declares a dividend or determines to make a capital gain distribution or other distribution, the Reinvestment Plan Agent will acquire shares for the participants’ accounts by the purchase of outstanding shares on the open market or on BMN’s primary exchange (“open market purchases”). BMN will not issue any new shares under the Reinvestment Plan.

You may elect not to participate in the Reinvestment Plan and to receive all dividends in cash by contacting the Reinvestment Plan Agent, at the address set forth below.

Participation in the Reinvestment Plan is completely voluntary and may be terminated or resumed at any time without penalty by notice if received and processed by the Reinvestment Plan Agent prior to the dividend record date. Additionally, the Reinvestment Plan Agent seeks to process notices received after the record date but prior to the payable date and such notices often will become effective by the payable date. Where late notices are not processed by the applicable payable date, such termination or resumption will be effective with respect to any subsequently declared dividend or other distribution.

The Reinvestment Plan Agent’s fees for the handling of the reinvestment of distributions will be paid by the Trust. However, each participant will pay a pro rata share of brokerage commissions incurred with respect to the Reinvestment Plan Agent’s open-market purchases in connection with the reinvestment of all distributions. The automatic reinvestment of all distributions will not relieve participants of any U.S. federal, state or local income tax that may be payable on such dividends or distributions.

The Trust reserves the right to amend or terminate the Reinvestment Plan. There is no direct service charge to participants in the Reinvestment Plan; however, the Trust reserves the right to amend the Reinvestment Plan to include a service charge payable by the participants. Participants in BMN that request a sale of shares are subject to a $2.50 sales fee and a $0.15 per share sold fee. Per share fees include any applicable brokerage commissions the Reinvestment Plan Agent is required to pay. All correspondence concerning the Reinvestment Plan should be directed to Computershare Trust Company, N.A. through the internet at computershare.com/blackrock, or in writing to Computershare, P.O. Box 43006, Providence, RI 02940-3078, Telephone: (800) 699-1236. Overnight correspondence should be directed to the Reinvestment Plan Agent at Computershare, 150 Royall Street, Suite 101, Canton, MA 02021.

 

 

A U T O M A T I C  D I V I D E N D  R E I N V E S T M E N T  P L A N		31

---

Trustee and Officer Information

 

Independent Trustees(a)
Name Year of Birth(b)		Position(s) Held (Length of Service)(c)		Principal Occupation(s) During Past 5 Years		Number of BlackRock-Advised Registered Investment Companies (“RICs”) Consisting of Investment Portfolios (“Portfolios”) Overseen		Public Company and Other Investment Company Directorships Held During Past 5 Years
R. Glenn Hubbard 1958		Chair of the Board (Since 2022) Trustee (Since 2022)		Dean, Columbia Business School from 2004 to 2019; Faculty member, Columbia Business School since 1988.		69 RICs consisting of 102 Portfolios		ADP (data and information services) from 2004 to 2020; Metropolitan Life Insurance Company (insurance); TotalEnergies SE (multi-energy)
W. Carl Kester(d) 1951		Vice Chair of the Board (Since 2022) Trustee (Since 2022)		Baker Foundation Professor and George Fisher Baker Jr. Professor of Business Administration, Emeritus, Harvard Business School since 2022; George Fisher Baker Jr. Professor of Business Administration, Harvard Business School from 2008 to 2022; Deputy Dean for Academic Affairs from 2006 to 2010; Chairman of the Finance Unit, from 2005 to 2006; Senior Associate Dean and Chairman of the MBA Program from 1999 to 2005; Member of the faculty of Harvard Business School since 1981.		71 RICs consisting of 104 Portfolios		None
Cynthia L. Egan 1955		Trustee (Since 2022)		Advisor, U.S. Department of the Treasury from 2014 to 2015; President, Retirement Plan Services, for T. Rowe Price Group, Inc. from 2007 to 2012; executive positions within Fidelity Investments from 1989 to 2007.		71 RICs consisting of 104 Portfolios		Unum (insurance); The Hanover Insurance Group (Board Chair); Huntsman Corporation (Lead Independent Director and non-Executive Vice Chair of the Board) (chemical products)
Frank J. Fabozzi(d) 1948		Trustee (Since 2022)		Editor of The Journal of Portfolio Management since 1986; Professor of Finance, EDHEC Business School (France) from 2011 to 2022; Professor of Practice, Johns Hopkins University since 2021; Professor in the Practice of Finance, Yale University School of Management from 1994 to 2011 and currently a Teaching Fellow in Yale’s Executive Programs; Visiting Professor, Rutgers University for the Spring 2019 semester; Visiting Professor, New York University for the 2019 academic year; Adjunct Professor of Finance, Carnegie Mellon University in fall 2020 semester.		71 RICs consisting of 104 Portfolios		None
Lorenzo A. Flores 1964		Trustee (Since 2022)		Vice Chairman, Kioxia, Inc. since 2019; Chief Financial Officer, Xilinx, Inc. from 2016 to 2019; Corporate Controller, Xilinx, Inc. from 2008 to 2016.		69 RICs consisting of 102 Portfolios		None
Stayce D. Harris 1959		Trustee (Since 2022)		Lieutenant General, Inspector General of the United States Air Force from 2017 to 2019; Lieutenant General, Assistant Vice Chief of Staff and Director, Air Staff, United States Air Force from 2016 to 2017; Major General, Commander, 22nd Air Force, AFRC, Dobbins Air Reserve Base, Georgia from 2014 to 2016; Pilot, United Airlines from 1990 to 2020.		69 RICs consisting of 102 Portfolios		KULR Technology Group, Inc. in 2021; The Boeing Company (airplane manufacturer)

 

 

32		2 0 2 3  B L A C K R O C K  A N N U A L  R E P O R T  T O  S H A R E H O L D E R S

---

Trustee and Officer Information (continued)

 

Independent Trustees(a) (continued)
Name Year of Birth(b)		Position(s) Held (Length of Service)(c)		Principal Occupation(s) During Past 5 Years		Number of BlackRock-Advised Registered Investment Companies (“RICs”) Consisting of Investment Portfolios (“Portfolios”) Overseen		Public Company and Other Investment Company Directorships Held During Past 5 Years
J. Phillip Holloman 1955		Trustee (Since 2022)		President and Chief Operating Officer, Cintas Corporation from 2008 to 2018.		69 RICs consisting of 102 Portfolios		PulteGroup, Inc. (home construction); Rockwell Automation Inc. (industrial automation); Vestis Corporation (uniforms and facilities services)
Catherine A. Lynch(d) 1961		Trustee (Since 2022)		Chief Executive Officer, Chief Investment Officer and various other positions, National Railroad Retirement Investment Trust from 2003 to 2016; Associate Vice President for Treasury Management, The George Washington University from 1999 to 2003; Assistant Treasurer, Episcopal Church of America from 1995 to 1999.		71 RICs consisting of 104 Portfolios		PennyMac Mortgage Investment Trust
Non-Management Interested Trustee(a)(f)
Name Year of Birth(b)		Position(s) Held (Length of Service)		Principal Occupation(s) During Past 5 Years		Number of BlackRock-Advised Registered Investment Companies (“RICs”) Consisting of Investment Portfolios (“Portfolios”) Overseen		Public Company and Other Investment Company Directorships Held During Past 5 Years
Arthur P. Steinmetz 1958		Trustee (Since 2023)		Consultant, Posit PBC (enterprise data science) since 2020; Director, ScotiaBank (U.S.) from 2020 to 2023; Chairman, Chief Executive Officer and President of OppenheimerFunds, Inc. from 2015, 2014 and 2013, respectively to 2019; Trustee, President and Principal Executive Officer of 104 OppenheimerFunds funds from 2014 to 2019; Portfolio manager of various OppenheimerFunds fixed income mutual funds from 1986 to 2014.		70 RICs consisting of 103 Portfolios		Trustee of 104 OppenheimerFunds funds from 2014 to 2019

 

 

T R U S T E E  A N D  O F F I C E R  I N F O R M A T I O N		33

---

Trustee and Officer Information (continued)

 

Interested Trustees(a)(e)
Name Year of Birth(b)		Position(s) Held (Length of Service)(c)		Principal Occupation(s) During Past 5 Years		Number of BlackRock-Advised Registered Investment Companies (“RICs”) Consisting of Investment Portfolios (“Portfolios”) Overseen		Public Company and Other Investment Company Directorships Held During Past 5 Years
Robert Fairbairn 1965		Trustee (Since 2022)		Vice Chairman of BlackRock, Inc. since 2019; Member of BlackRock’s Global Executive and Global Operating Committees; Co-Chair of BlackRock’s Human Capital Committee; Senior Managing Director of BlackRock, Inc. from 2010 to 2019; oversaw BlackRock’s Strategic Partner Program and Strategic Product Management Group from 2012 to 2019; Member of the Board of Managers of BlackRock Investments, LLC from 2011 to 2018; Global Head of BlackRock’s Retail and iShares® businesses from 2012 to 2016.		97 RICs consisting of 268 Portfolios		None
John M. Perlowski(d) 1964		Trustee (Since 2022) President and Chief Executive Officer (Since 2022)		Managing Director of BlackRock, Inc. since 2009; Head of BlackRock Global Accounting and Product Services since 2009; Advisory Director of Family Resource Network (charitable foundation) since 2009.		99 RICs consisting of 270 Portfolios		None

(a)	The address of each Trustee is c/o BlackRock, Inc., 50 Hudson Yards, New York, New York 10001.

 

(b)

Each Independent Trustee holds office until his or her successor is duly elected and qualifies or until his or her earlier death, resignation, retirement or removal as provided by the Trust’s by-laws or charter or statute, or until December 31 of the year in which he or she turns 75. Trustees who are “interested persons,” as defined in the Investment Company Act serve until their successor is duly elected and qualifies or until their earlier death, resignation, retirement or removal as provided by the Trust’s by-laws or statute, or until December 31 of the year in which they turn 72. The Board may determine to extend the terms of Independent Trustees on a case-by-case basis, as appropriate.

 

(c)

Following the combination of Merrill Lynch Investment Managers, L.P. (“MLIM”) and BlackRock, Inc. in September 2006, the various legacy MLIM and legacy BlackRock fund boards were realigned and consolidated into three new fund boards in 2007. Certain Independent Trustees first became members of the boards of other legacy MLIM or legacy BlackRock funds as follows: Frank J. Fabozzi, 1988; R. Glenn Hubbard, 2004; and W. Carl Kester, 1995.

 

(d)	Dr. Fabozzi, Ms. Egan, Dr. Kester, Ms. Lynch, Mr. Steinmetz and Mr. Perlowski are also trustees of the BlackRock Credit Strategies Fund and BlackRock Private Investments Fund.

 

(e)	Mr. Fairbairn and Mr. Perlowski are both “interested persons,” as defined in the 1940 Act, of the Trust based on their positions with BlackRock, Inc. and its affiliates. Mr. Fairbairn and Mr. Perlowski are also board members of the BlackRock Multi-Asset Complex.

 

(f)

Mr. Steinmetz is currently classified as a non-management interested Trustee based on his former directorship at another company that is not an affiliate of BlackRock, Inc. Mr. Steinmetz does not currently serve as an officer or employee of BlackRock, Inc. or its affiliates or own any securities of BlackRock, Inc. It is anticipated that Mr. Steinmetz will become an Independent Trustee effective January 19, 2024.

 

Officers Who Are Not Trustees(a)
Name Year of Birth(b)		Position(s) Held (Length of Service)		Principal Occupation(s) During Past 5 Years
Jonathan Diorio 1980		Vice President (Since 2022)		Managing Director of BlackRock, Inc. since 2015; Director of BlackRock, Inc. from 2011 to 2015.
Trent Walker 1974		Chief Financial Officer (Since 2022)		Managing Director of BlackRock, Inc. since September 2019; Executive Vice President of PIMCO from 2016 to 2019; Senior Vice President of PIMCO from 2008 to 2015; Treasurer from 2013 to 2019 and Assistant Treasurer from 2007 to 2017 of PIMCO Funds, PIMCO Variable Insurance Trust, PIMCO ETF Trust, PIMCO Equity Series, PIMCO Equity Series VIT, PIMCO Managed Accounts Trust, 2 PIMCO-sponsored interval funds and 21 PIMCO-sponsored closed-end funds.
Jay M. Fife 1970		Treasurer (Since 2022)		Managing Director of BlackRock, Inc. since 2007.
Aaron Wasserman 1974		Chief Compliance Officer (Since 2023)		Managing Director of BlackRock, Inc. since 2018; Chief Compliance Officer of the BlackRock-advised funds in the BlackRock Multi-Asset Complex, the BlackRock Fixed-Income Complex and the iShares Complex since 2023; Deputy Chief Compliance Officer for the BlackRock-advised funds in the BlackRock Multi-Asset Complex, the BlackRock Fixed- Income Complex and the iShares Complex from 2014 to 2023.
Janey Ahn 1975		Secretary (Since 2022)		Managing Director of BlackRock, Inc. since 2018; Director of BlackRock, Inc. from 2009 to 2017.

(a)	The address of each Officer is c/o BlackRock, Inc., 50 Hudson Yards, New York, New York 10001.

(b)	Officers of the Trust serve at the pleasure of the Board.

 

 

34		2 0 2 3  B L A C K R O C K  A N N U A L  R E P O R T  T O  S H A R E H O L D E R S

---

Trustee and Officer Information (continued)

 

 

 

T R U S T E E  A N D  O F F I C E R  I N F O R M A T I O N		35

---

Additional Information

 

Proxy Results

The Annual Meeting of Shareholders was held on July 12, 2023 and adjourned to July 31, 2023 for shareholders of record on May 15, 2023, to elect trustee nominees for the Trust. There were no broker non-votes with regard to the Trust.

Shareholders elected the Class I Trustees as follows:

 

Cynthia L. Egan

Lorenzo A. Flores

Stayce D. Harris

Catherine A. Lynch

Fund Name

Votes For

Votes Withheld

Votes For

Votes Withheld

Votes For

Votes Withheld

Votes For

Votes Withheld

BMN

3,468,740

2,132,113

5,537,909

62,944

5,537,909

62,944

3,468,740

2,132,113

For the Trust listed above, Trustees whose term of office continued after the Annual Meeting of Shareholders because they were not up for election are Robert Fairbairn, J. Phillip Holloman, R. Glenn Hubbard, John M. Perlowski, Frank J. Fabozzi and W. Carl Kester.

Trust Certification

The Trust is listed for trading on the NYSE and has filed with the NYSE its annual chief executive officer certification regarding compliance with the NYSE’s listing standards. The Trust filed with the SEC the certification of its chief executive officer and chief financial officer required by Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act.

Environmental, Social and Governance (“ESG”) Integration

Although the Trust does not seek to implement a specific sustainability objective, strategy or process unless otherwise disclosed, Trust management will consider ESG factors as part of the investment process for the Trust. Trust management views ESG integration as the practice of incorporating financially material ESG data or information into investment processes with the objective of enhancing risk-adjusted returns. These ESG considerations will vary depending on the Trust’s particular investment strategies and may include consideration of third-party research as well as consideration of proprietary BlackRock research across the ESG risks and opportunities regarding an issuer. The ESG characteristics utilized in the Trust’s investment process are anticipated to evolve over time and one or more characteristics may not be relevant with respect to all issuers that are eligible for investment. Certain of these considerations may affect the Trust’s exposure to certain companies or industries. While Trust management views ESG considerations as having the potential to contribute to the Trust’s long-term performance, there is no guarantee that such results will be achieved.

Dividend Policy

The Trust’s dividend policy is to distribute all or a portion of its net investment income to its shareholders on a monthly basis. In order to provide shareholders with a more stable level of distributions, the Trust may at times pay out less than the entire amount of net investment income earned in any particular month and may at times in any particular month pay out such accumulated but undistributed income in addition to net investment income earned in that month. As a result, the distributions paid by the Trust for any particular month may be more or less than the amount of net investment income earned by the Trust during such month. The Trust’s current accumulated but undistributed net investment income, if any, is disclosed as accumulated earnings (loss) in the Statement of Assets and Liabilities, which comprises part of the financial information included in this report.

General Information

The Trust does not make available copies of its Statement of Additional Information because the Trust’s shares are not continuously offered, which means that the Statement of Additional Information of the Trust has not been updated after completion of the Trust’s offerings and the information contained in the Trust’s Statement of Additional Information may have become outdated.

The following information is a summary of certain changes since December 31, 2022. This information may not reflect all of the changes that have occurred since you purchased the Trust.

Except if noted otherwise herein, there were no changes to the Trust’s charter or by-laws that would delay or prevent a change of control of the Trust that were not approved by the shareholders. Except if noted otherwise herein, there have been no changes in the persons who are primarily responsible for the day-to-day management of the Trust’s portfolios.

Quarterly performance, semi-annual and annual reports, current net asset value and other information regarding the Trust may be found on BlackRock’s website, which can be accessed at blackrock.com. Any reference to BlackRock’s website in this report is intended to allow investors public access to information regarding the Trust and does not, and is not intended to, incorporate BlackRock’s website in this report.

Electronic Delivery

Shareholders can sign up for e-mail notifications of quarterly statements, annual and semi-annual shareholder reports by enrolling in the electronic delivery program. Electronic copies of shareholder reports are available on BlackRock’s website.

To enroll in electronic delivery:

 

 

36		2 0 2 3  B L A C K R O C K  A N N U A L  R E P O R T  T O  S H A R E H O L D E R S

---

Additional Information  (continued)

 

Shareholders Who Hold Accounts with Investment Advisers, Banks or Brokerages:

Please contact your financial adviser. Please note that not all investment advisers, banks or brokerages may offer this service.

Householding

The Trust will mail only one copy of shareholder documents, annual and semi-annual reports, Rule 30e-3 notices and proxy statements, to shareholders with multiple accounts at the same address. This practice is commonly called “householding” and is intended to reduce expenses and eliminate duplicate mailings of shareholder documents. Mailings of your shareholder documents may be householded indefinitely unless you instruct us otherwise. If you do not want the mailing of these documents to be combined with those for other members of your household, please call the Trust at (800) 882-0052.

Availability of Quarterly Schedule of Investments

The Trust files its complete schedule of portfolio holdings with the SEC for the first and third quarters of each fiscal year as an exhibit to its reports on Form N-PORT. The Trust’s Form N-PORT is available on the SEC’s website at sec.gov. Additionally, the Trust makes its portfolio holdings for the first and third quarters of each fiscal year available at blackrock.com/fundreports.

Availability of Proxy Voting Policies, Procedures and Voting Records

A description of the policies and procedures that the Trust uses to determine how to vote proxies relating to portfolio securities and information about how the Trust voted proxies relating to securities held in the Trust’s portfolio during the most recent 12-month period ended June 30 is available without charge, upon request (1) by calling (800) 882-0052; (2) on the BlackRock website at blackrock.com; and (3) on the SEC’s website at sec.gov.

Availability of Trust Updates

BlackRock will update performance and certain other data for the Trust on a monthly basis on its website in the “Closed-end Funds” section of blackrock.com as well as certain other material information as necessary from time to time. Investors and others are advised to check the website for updated performance information and the release of other material information about the Trust. This reference to BlackRock’s website is intended to allow investors public access to information regarding the Trust and does not, and is not intended to, incorporate BlackRock’s website in this report.

BlackRock Privacy Principles

BlackRock is committed to maintaining the privacy of its current and former fund investors and individual clients (collectively, “Clients”) and to safeguarding their non-public personal information. The following information is provided to help you understand what personal information BlackRock collects, how we protect that information and why in certain cases we share such information with select parties.

If you are located in a jurisdiction where specific laws, rules or regulations require BlackRock to provide you with additional or different privacy-related rights beyond what is set forth below, then BlackRock will comply with those specific laws, rules or regulations.

BlackRock obtains or verifies personal non-public information from and about you from different sources, including the following: (i) information we receive from you or, if applicable, your financial intermediary, on applications, forms or other documents; (ii) information about your transactions with us, our affiliates, or others; (iii) information we receive from a consumer reporting agency; and (iv) from visits to our websites.

BlackRock does not sell or disclose to non-affiliated third parties any non-public personal information about its Clients, except as permitted by law or as is necessary to respond to regulatory requests or to service Client accounts. These non-affiliated third parties are required to protect the confidentiality and security of this information and to use it only for its intended purpose.

We may share information with our affiliates to service your account or to provide you with information about other BlackRock products or services that may be of interest to you. In addition, BlackRock restricts access to non-public personal information about its Clients to those BlackRock employees with a legitimate business need for the information. BlackRock maintains physical, electronic and procedural safeguards that are designed to protect the non-public personal information of its Clients, including procedures relating to the proper storage and disposal of such information.

Trust and Service Providers

 

Investment Adviser		Transfer Agent
BlackRock Advisors, LLC		Computershare Trust Company, N.A.
Wilmington, DE 19809		Canton, MA 02021
Accounting Agent and Custodian		Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
State Street Bank and Trust Company		Deloitte & Touche LLP
Boston, MA 02114		Boston, MA 02116

 

 

A D D I T I O N A L  I N F O R M A T I O N		37

---

Additional Information  (continued)

 

Trust and Service Providers (continued)

 

Legal Counsel		Address of the Trust
Willkie Farr & Gallagher LLP		100 Bellevue Parkway
New York, NY 10019		Wilmington, DE 19809

 

 

38		2 0 2 3  B L A C K R O C K  A N N U A L  R E P O R T  T O  S H A R E H O L D E R S

---

Glossary of Terms Used in this Report

 

Currency Abbreviation
AGM		Assured Guaranty Municipal Corp.
AMT		Alternative Minimum Tax
ARB		Airport Revenue Bonds
FHLMC		Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corp.
FNMA		Federal National Mortgage Association
GNMA		Government National Mortgage Association
GO		General Obligation Bonds
M/F		Multi-Family
NPFGC		National Public Finance Guarantee Corp.
RB		Revenue Bond
S/F		Single-Family
SAB		Special Assessment Bonds

 

 

G L O S S A R Y  O F  T E R M S  U S E D  I N  T H I S  R E P O R T		39

---

 

Want to know more?

blackrock.com | 800-882-0052

This report is intended for current holders. It is not a prospectus. Past performance results shown in this report should not be considered a representation of future performance. Statements and other information herein are as dated and are subject to change.

MTTT-12/23-AR

 

 

---

(b) Not Applicable

---

Item 2 –

Code of Ethics – The registrant (or the “Fund”) has adopted a code of ethics, as of the end of the period covered by this report, applicable to the registrant’s principal executive officer, principal financial officer, principal accounting officer or controller, or persons performing similar functions. During the period covered by this report, the code of ethics was amended to update certain information and to make other non-material changes. During the period covered by this report, there have been no waivers granted under the code of ethics. The registrant undertakes to provide a copy of the code of ethics to any person upon request, without charge, who calls 1-800-882-0052, option 4.

 

Item 3 –

Audit Committee Financial Expert – The registrant’s board of directors (the “board of directors”), has determined that (i) the registrant has the following audit committee financial experts serving on its audit committee and (ii) each audit committee financial expert is independent:

Frank J. Fabozzi

Lorenzo A. Flores

Catherine A. Lynch

Under applicable securities laws, a person determined to be an audit committee financial expert will not be deemed an “expert” for any purpose, including without limitation for the purposes of Section 11 of the Securities Act of 1933, as a result of being designated or identified as an audit committee financial expert. The designation or identification of a person as an audit committee financial expert does not impose on such person any duties, obligations, or liabilities greater than the duties, obligations, and liabilities imposed on such person as a member of the audit committee and board of directors in the absence of such designation or identification. The designation or identification of a person as an audit committee financial expert does not affect the duties, obligations, or liability of any other member of the audit committee or board of directors.

 

Item 4 –

Principal Accountant Fees and Services

The following table presents fees billed by Deloitte & Touche LLP (“D&T”) in each of the last two fiscal years for the services rendered to the Fund:

 

(a) Audit Fees

(b) Audit-Related Fees1

(c) Tax Fees2

(d) All Other Fees

Entity Name

Current  Fiscal Year End

Previous  Fiscal Year End

Current  Fiscal Year End

Previous  Fiscal Year End

Current  Fiscal Year End

Previous  Fiscal Year End3

Current  Fiscal Year End

Previous  Fiscal Year End

BlackRock 2037 Municipal Target Term Trust

$32,946

$28,560

$0

$0

$15,100

$14,500

$407

$0

The following table presents fees billed by D&T that were required to be approved by the registrant’s audit committee (the “Committee”) for services that relate directly to the operations or financial reporting of the Fund and that are rendered on behalf of BlackRock Advisors, LLC (the “Investment Adviser” or “BlackRock”) and entities controlling, controlled by, or under common control with BlackRock (not including any sub-adviser whose role is primarily portfolio management and is

 

2

---

subcontracted with or overseen by another investment adviser) that provide ongoing services to the Fund (“Affiliated Service Providers”):

 

		Current Fiscal Year End		Previous Fiscal Year End
(b) Audit-Related Fees1		$0		$0
(c) Tax Fees2		$0		$0
(d) All Other Fees3		$2,154,000		$2,098,000

¹ The nature of the services includes assurance and related services reasonably related to the performance of the audit or review of financial statements not included in Audit Fees, including accounting consultations, agreed-upon procedure reports, attestation reports, comfort letters, out-of-pocket expenses and internal control reviews not required by regulators.

² The nature of the services includes tax compliance and/or tax preparation, including services relating to the filing or amendment of federal, state or local income tax returns, regulated investment company qualification reviews, taxable income and tax distribution calculations.

³ Non-audit fees of $2,154,000 and $2,098,000 for the current fiscal year and previous fiscal year, respectively, were paid to the Fund’s principal accountant in their entirety by BlackRock, in connection with services provided to the Affiliated Service Providers of the Fund and of certain other funds sponsored and advised by BlackRock or its affiliates for a service organization review and an accounting research tool subscription. These amounts represent aggregate fees paid by BlackRock and were not allocated on a per fund basis.

(e)(1) Audit Committee Pre-Approval Policies and Procedures:

The Committee has adopted policies and procedures with regard to the pre-approval of services. Audit, audit-related and tax compliance services provided to the registrant on an annual basis require specific pre-approval by the Committee. The Committee also must approve other non-audit services provided to the registrant and those non-audit services provided to the Investment Adviser and Affiliated Service Providers that relate directly to the operations and the financial reporting of the registrant. Certain of these non-audit services that the Committee believes are (a) consistent with the SEC’s auditor independence rules and (b) routine and recurring services that will not impair the independence of the independent accountants may be approved by the Committee without consideration on a specific case-by-case basis (“general pre-approval”). The term of any general pre-approval is 12 months from the date of the pre-approval, unless the Committee provides for a different period. Tax or other non-audit services provided to the registrant which have a direct impact on the operations or financial reporting of the registrant will only be deemed pre-approved provided that any individual project does not exceed $10,000 attributable to the registrant or $50,000 per project. For this purpose, multiple projects will be aggregated to determine if they exceed the previously mentioned cost levels.

Any proposed services exceeding the pre-approved cost levels will require specific pre-approval by the Committee, as will any other services not subject to general pre-approval (e.g., unanticipated but permissible services). The Committee is informed of each service approved subject to general pre-approval at the next regularly scheduled in-person board meeting. At this meeting, an analysis of such services is presented to the Committee for ratification. The Committee may delegate to the Committee Chairman the authority to approve the provision of and fees for any specific engagement of permitted non-audit services, including services exceeding pre-approved cost levels.

(e)(2) None of the services described in each of Items 4(b) through (d) were approved by the Committee pursuant to the de minimis exception in paragraph (c)(7)(i)(C) of Rule 2-01 of Regulation S-X.

(f) Not Applicable

 

3

---

(g) The aggregate non-audit fees, defined as the sum of the fees shown under “Audit-Related Fees,” “Tax Fees” and “All Other Fees,” paid to the accountant for services rendered by the accountant to the registrant, the Investment Adviser and the Affiliated Service Providers were:

 

Entity Name		Current Fiscal Year  End		Previous Fiscal  Year End
BlackRock 2037 Municipal Target Term Trust		$15,507		$14,500

Additionally, the amounts billed by D&T in connection with services provided to the Affiliated Service Providers of the Fund and of other funds sponsored or advised by BlackRock or its affiliates during the current and previous fiscal years for a service organization review and an accounting research tool subscription were:

 

Current Fiscal Year  End		Previous Fiscal Year  End
$2,154,000		$2,098,000

These amounts represent aggregate fees paid by BlackRock and were not allocated on a per fund basis.

(h) The Committee has considered and determined that the provision of non-audit services that were rendered to the Investment Adviser, and the Affiliated Service Providers that were not pre-approved pursuant to paragraph (c)(7)(ii) of Rule 2-01 of Regulation S-X is compatible with maintaining the principal accountant’s independence.

(i) – Not Applicable

(j) – Not Applicable

 

Item 5 –

Audit Committee of Listed Registrant

(a) The following individuals are members of the registrant’s separately designated standing audit committee established in accordance with Section 3(a)(58)(A) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78c(a)(58)(A)):

Frank J. Fabozzi

Lorenzo A. Flores

J. Phillip Holloman

Catherine A. Lynch

(b) Not Applicable

 

Item 6 –

Investments

 

4

---

(a) The registrant’s Schedule of Investments is included as part of the Report to Stockholders filed under Item 1(a) of this Form.

(b) Not Applicable due to no such divestments during the semi-annual period covered since the previous Form N-CSR filing.

 

Item 7 –

Disclosure of Proxy Voting Policies and Procedures for Closed-End Management Investment Companies – The board of directors has delegated the voting of proxies for the Fund’s portfolio securities to the Investment Adviser pursuant to the Investment Adviser’s proxy voting guidelines. Under these guidelines, the Investment Adviser will vote proxies related to Fund securities in the best interests of the Fund and its stockholders. From time to time, a vote may present a conflict between the interests of the Fund’s stockholders, on the one hand, and those of the Investment Adviser, or any affiliated person of the Fund or the Investment Adviser, on the other. In such event, provided that the Investment Adviser’s Equity Investment Policy Oversight Committee, or a sub-committee thereof (the “Oversight Committee”) is aware of the real or potential conflict or material non-routine matter and if the Oversight Committee does not reasonably believe it is able to follow its general voting guidelines (or if the particular proxy matter is not addressed in the guidelines) and vote impartially, the Oversight Committee may retain an independent fiduciary to advise the Oversight Committee on how to vote or to cast votes on behalf of the Investment Adviser’s clients. If the Investment Adviser determines not to retain an independent fiduciary, or does not desire to follow the advice of such independent fiduciary, the Oversight Committee shall determine how to vote the proxy after consulting with the Investment Adviser’s Portfolio Management Group and/or the Investment Adviser’s Legal and Compliance Department and concluding that the vote cast is in its client’s best interest notwithstanding the conflict. A copy of the Fund’s Proxy Voting Policy and Procedures are attached as Exhibit 99.PROXYPOL, a copy of the Fund’s Global Corporate Governance  & Engagement Principles are attached as Exhibit 99.GLOBAL.CORP.GOV and a copy of the Fund’s Corporate Governance and Proxy Voting Guidelines for U.S. Securities are attached as Exhibit 99.US.CORP.GOV. Information on how the Fund voted proxies relating to portfolio securities during the most recent 12-month period ended June 30 is available without charge, (i) at www.blackrock.com and (ii) on the SEC’s website at http://www.sec.gov.

 

Item 8 –

Portfolio Managers of Closed-End Management Investment Companies

(a)(1) As of the date of filing this Report:

The registrant is managed by a team of investment professionals comprised of Phillip Soccio, CFA, Director at BlackRock, and Christian Romaglino, CFA, Director at BlackRock. Each is a member of BlackRock’s municipal tax-exempt management group. Each is jointly responsible for the day-to-day management of the registrant’s portfolio, which includes setting the registrant’s overall investment strategy, overseeing the management of the registrant and/or selection of its investments. Messrs. Soccio and Romaglino have been members of the registrant’s portfolio management team since 2022.

 

5

---

Portfolio Manager		Biography
Phillip Soccio, CFA		Director of BlackRock since 2009; Vice President of BlackRock from 2005 to 2008.
Christian Romaglino, CFA		Director of BlackRock since 2017; Portfolio Manager for the Municipal Mutual Fund Desk within BlackRock’s Global Fixed Income Group since 2017; Portfolio Manager of Brown Brothers Harriman from 2007 to 2017.

(a)(2) As of December 31, 2023:

 

		(ii) Number of Other Accounts Managed and Assets by Account Type						(iii) Number of Other Accounts and Assets for Which Advisory Fee is Performance-Based
(i) Name of Portfolio Manager		Other    Registered    Investment Companies		Other Pooled    Investment    Vehicles		Other    Accounts		Other    Registered    Investment Companies		Other Pooled    Investment    Vehicles		Other    Accounts
Phillip Soccio, CFA		34		0		0		0		0		0
		$30.27 Billion		$0		$0		$0		$0		$0
Christian Romaglino, CFA		34		0		0		0		0		0
		$17.59 Billion		$0		$0		$0		$0		$0

(iv) Portfolio Manager Potential Material Conflicts of Interest

BlackRock has built a professional working environment, firm-wide compliance culture and compliance procedures and systems designed to protect against potential incentives that may favor one account over another. BlackRock has adopted policies and procedures that address the allocation of investment opportunities, execution of portfolio transactions, personal trading by employees and other potential conflicts of interest that are designed to ensure that all client accounts are treated equitably over time. Nevertheless, BlackRock furnishes investment management and advisory services to numerous clients in addition to the Fund, and BlackRock may, consistent with applicable law, make investment recommendations to other clients or accounts (including accounts which are hedge funds or have performance or higher fees paid to BlackRock, or in which portfolio managers have a personal interest in the receipt of such fees), which may be the same as or different from those made to the Fund. In addition, BlackRock, Inc., its affiliates and significant shareholders and any officer, director, shareholder or employee may or may not have an interest in the securities whose purchase and sale BlackRock recommends to the Fund. BlackRock, Inc., or any of its affiliates or significant shareholders, or any officer, director, shareholder, employee or any member of their families may take different actions than those recommended to the Fund by BlackRock with respect to the same securities. Moreover, BlackRock may refrain from rendering any advice or services concerning securities of companies of which any of BlackRock, Inc.’s (or its affiliates’ or significant shareholders’) officers, directors or employees are directors or officers, or companies as to which BlackRock, Inc. or any of its affiliates or significant shareholders or the officers, directors and employees of any of them has any substantial economic interest or possesses material non-public information. Certain portfolio managers also may manage accounts whose investment strategies may at times be opposed to the strategy utilized for a fund. It should also be noted that a portfolio manager may be managing hedge fund and/or long only accounts, or may be part of a team managing hedge fund and/or long only accounts, subject to incentive fees. Such portfolio managers may therefore be entitled to receive a portion of any incentive fees earned on such accounts. Currently, the portfolio managers of the Fund are not entitled to receive a portion of incentive fees of other accounts.

 

6

---

As a fiduciary, BlackRock owes a duty of loyalty to its clients and must treat each client fairly. When BlackRock purchases or sells securities for more than one account, the trades must be allocated in a manner consistent with its fiduciary duties. BlackRock attempts to allocate investments in a fair and equitable manner among client accounts, with no account receiving preferential treatment. To this end, BlackRock, Inc. has adopted policies that are intended to ensure reasonable efficiency in client transactions and provide BlackRock with sufficient flexibility to allocate investments in a manner that is consistent with the particular investment discipline and client base, as appropriate.

(a)(3) As of December 31, 2023:

Portfolio Manager Compensation Overview

The discussion below describes the portfolio managers’ compensation as of December 31, 2023.

BlackRock’s financial arrangements with its portfolio managers, its competitive compensation and its career path emphasis at all levels reflect the value senior management places on key resources. Compensation may include a variety of components and may vary from year to year based on a number of factors. The principal components of compensation include a base salary, a performance-based discretionary bonus, participation in various benefits programs and one or more of the incentive compensation programs established by BlackRock.

Base Compensation. Generally, portfolio managers receive base compensation based on their position with the firm.

Discretionary Incentive Compensation. Discretionary incentive compensation is a function of several components: the performance of BlackRock, Inc., the performance of the portfolio manager’s group within BlackRock, the investment performance, including risk-adjusted returns, of the firm’s assets under management or supervision by that portfolio manager relative to predetermined benchmarks, and the individual’s performance and contribution to the overall performance of these portfolios and BlackRock. In most cases, these benchmarks are the same as the benchmark or benchmarks against which the performance of the Funds or other accounts managed by the portfolio managers are measured. Among other things, BlackRock’s Chief Investment Officers make a subjective determination with respect to each portfolio manager’s compensation based on the performance of the Funds and other accounts managed by each portfolio manager relative to the various benchmarks. Performance of fixed income funds is measured on a pre-tax and/or after-tax basis over various time periods including 1-, 3- and 5- year periods, as applicable. With respect to these portfolio managers, such benchmarks for the Fund and other accounts are: a combination of market-based indices (e.g., Bloomberg Municipal Bond Index), certain customized indices and certain fund industry peer groups.

 

7

---

Distribution of Discretionary Incentive Compensation. Discretionary incentive compensation is distributed to portfolio managers in a combination of cash, deferred BlackRock, Inc. stock awards, and/or deferred cash awards that notionally track the return of certain BlackRock investment products.

Portfolio managers receive their annual discretionary incentive compensation in the form of cash. Portfolio managers whose total compensation is above a specified threshold also receive deferred BlackRock, Inc. stock awards annually as part of their discretionary incentive compensation. Paying a portion of discretionary incentive compensation in the form of deferred BlackRock, Inc. stock puts compensation earned by a portfolio manager for a given year “at risk” based on BlackRock’s ability to sustain and improve its performance over future periods. In some cases, additional deferred BlackRock, Inc. stock may be granted to certain key employees as part of a long-term incentive award to aid in retention, align interests with long-term shareholders and motivate performance. Deferred BlackRock, Inc. stock awards are generally granted in the form of BlackRock, Inc. restricted stock units that vest pursuant to the terms of the applicable plan and, once vested, settle in BlackRock, Inc. common stock. The portfolio managers of this Fund have deferred BlackRock, Inc. stock awards.

For certain portfolio managers, a portion of the discretionary incentive compensation is also distributed in the form of deferred cash awards that notionally track the returns of select BlackRock investment products they manage, which provides direct alignment of portfolio manager discretionary incentive compensation with investment product results. Deferred cash awards vest ratably over a number of years and, once vested, settle in the form of cash. Only portfolio managers who manage specified products and whose total compensation is above a specified threshold are eligible to participate in the deferred cash award program.

Other Compensation Benefits. In addition to base salary and discretionary incentive compensation, portfolio managers may be eligible to receive or participate in one or more of the following:

Incentive Savings Plans — BlackRock, Inc. has created a variety of incentive savings plans in which BlackRock, Inc. employees are eligible to participate, including a 401(k) plan, the BlackRock Retirement Savings Plan (RSP), and the BlackRock Employee Stock Purchase Plan (ESPP). The employer contribution components of the RSP include a company match equal to 50% of the first 8% of eligible pay contributed to the plan capped at $5,000 per year, and a company retirement contribution equal to 3-5% of eligible compensation up to the Internal Revenue Service limit ($330,000 for 2023). The RSP offers a range of investment options, including registered investment companies and collective investment funds managed by the firm. BlackRock, Inc. contributions follow the investment direction set by participants for their own contributions or, absent participant investment direction, are invested into a target date fund that corresponds to, or is closest to, the year in which the participant attains age 65. The ESPP allows for investment in BlackRock, Inc. common stock at a 5% discount on the fair market value of the stock on the purchase date. Annual participation in the ESPP is limited to the purchase of 1,000 shares of common stock or a dollar value of $25,000 based on its fair market value on the purchase date. All of the eligible portfolio managers are eligible to participate in these plans.

(a)(4) Beneficial Ownership of Securities – As of December 31, 2023.

 

8

---

Portfolio Manager		Dollar Range of Equity Securities of the Fund Beneficially Owned
Phillip Soccio, CFA		None
Christian Romaglino, CFA		None

(b) Not Applicable

 

Item 9 –

Purchases of Equity Securities by Closed-End Management Investment Company and Affiliated Purchasers – Not Applicable due to no such purchases during the period covered by this report.

 

Item 10 –

Submission of Matters to a Vote of Security Holders – There have been no material changes to these procedures.

 

Item 11 –

Controls and Procedures

(a) The registrant’s principal executive and principal financial officers, or persons performing similar functions, have concluded that the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Rule 30a-3(c) under the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended (the “1940 Act”)) are effective as of a date within 90 days of the filing of this report based on the evaluation of these controls and procedures required by Rule 30a-3(b) under the 1940 Act and Rule 13a-15(b) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.

(b) There were no changes in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Rule 30a-3(d) under the 1940 Act) that occurred during the period covered by this report that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.

 

Item 12 –

Disclosure of Securities Lending Activities for Closed-End Management Investment Companies – Not Applicable

 

Item 13 –

Recovery of Erroneously Awarded Compensation – Not Applicable

 

Item 14 –

Exhibits attached hereto

(a)(1) Code of Ethics – See Item 2

(a)(2) Section 302 Certifications are attached

(a)(3) Any written solicitation to purchase securities under Rule 23c-1 – Not Applicable

(a)(4) Change in Registrant’s independent public accountant – Not Applicable

(b) Section 906 Certifications are attached

 

9

---

Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the Investment Company Act of 1940, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.

BlackRock 2037 Municipal Target Term Trust

 

		By:		/s/ John M. Perlowski
				John M. Perlowski
				Chief Executive Officer (principal executive officer) of
				BlackRock 2037 Municipal Target Term Trust

Date: February 23, 2024

Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the Investment Company Act of 1940, this report has been signed below by the following persons on behalf of the registrant and in the capacities and on the dates indicated.

 

		By:		/s/ John M. Perlowski
				John M. Perlowski
				Chief Executive Officer (principal executive officer) of
				BlackRock 2037 Municipal Target Term Trust

Date: February 23, 2024

 

		By:		/s/ Trent Walker
				Trent Walker
				Chief Financial Officer (principal financial officer) of
				BlackRock 2037 Municipal Target Term Trust

Date: February 23, 2024

 

10

EX-99. CERT

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO RULE 30a-2(a) UNDER THE 1940 ACT AND SECTION 302 OF THE

SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

 

 

I, John M. Perlowski, Chief Executive Officer (principal executive officer) of BlackRock 2037 Municipal Target Term Trust, certify that:

1.   I have reviewed this report on Form N-CSR of BlackRock 2037 Municipal Target Term Trust;

2.   Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3.   Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations, changes in net assets, and cash flows (if the financial statements are required to include a statement of cash flows) of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4.   The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Rule 30a-3(c) under the Investment Company Act of 1940) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Rule 30a-3(d) under the Investment Company Act of 1940) for the registrant and have:

a)   designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;

b)   designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such internal control over financial reporting to be designed under our supervision, to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles;

c)   evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date of this report based on such evaluation; and

d)   disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the period covered by this report that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and

5.   The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

a)   all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize, and report financial information; and

b)   any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.

Date: February 23, 2024

/s/ John M. Perlowski  

John M. Perlowski

Chief Executive Officer (principal executive officer) of

BlackRock 2037 Municipal Target Term Trust

---

EX-99. CERT

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO RULE 30a-2(a) UNDER THE 1940 ACT AND SECTION 302 OF THE

SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

 

 

I, Trent Walker, Chief Financial Officer (principal financial officer) of BlackRock 2037 Municipal Target Term Trust, certify that:

1.   I have reviewed this report on Form N-CSR of BlackRock 2037 Municipal Target Term Trust;

2.   Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3.   Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations, changes in net assets, and cash flows (if the financial statements are required to include a statement of cash flows) of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4.   The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Rule 30a-3(c) under the Investment Company Act of 1940) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Rule 30a-3(d) under the Investment Company Act of 1940) for the registrant and have:

a)   designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;

b)   designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such internal control over financial reporting to be designed under our supervision, to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles;

c)   evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date of this report based on such evaluation; and

d)   disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the period covered by this report that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and

5.   The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

a)   all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize, and report financial information; and

b)   any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.

 

Date: February 23, 2024

/s/ Trent Walker

Trent Walker

Chief Financial Officer (principal financial officer) of

BlackRock 2037 Municipal Target Term Trust

Exhibit 99.906CERT

Certification Pursuant to Rule 30a-2(b) under the 1940 Act and

Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, the undersigned officer of BlackRock 2037 Municipal Target Term Trust (the “Registrant”), hereby certifies, to the best of his knowledge, that the Registrant’s Report on Form N-CSR for the period ended December 31, 2023 (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and that the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Registrant.

Date: February 23, 2024

/s/ John M. Perlowski  

John M. Perlowski

Chief Executive Officer (principal executive officer) of

BlackRock 2037 Municipal Target Term Trust

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, the undersigned officer of BlackRock 2037 Municipal Target Term Trust (the “Registrant”), hereby certifies, to the best of his knowledge, that the Registrant’s Report on Form N-CSR for the period ended December 31, 2023 (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and that the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Registrant.

Date: February 23, 2024

/s/ Trent Walker  

Trent Walker

Chief Financial Officer (principal financial officer) of

BlackRock 2037 Municipal Target Term Trust

This certification is being furnished pursuant to Rule 30a-2(b) under the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended, and 18 U.S.C. § 1350 and is not being filed as part of the Form N-CSR with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

Closed-End Fund Proxy Voting Policy

August 1, 2021

 

 

Closed-End Fund Proxy Voting Policy   Procedures Governing Delegation of Proxy Voting to Fund Adviser

Effective Date: August 1, 2021 Last Review Date: August 25, 2023

 

 

 

Applies to the following types of Funds registered under the 1940 Act:

☐ Open-End Mutual Funds (including money market funds)

☐ Money Market Funds

☐ Exchange-Traded Funds

☒ Closed-End Funds

☐ Other

 

 

Objective and Scope

Set forth below is the Closed-End Fund Proxy Voting Policy.

Policy / Document Requirements and Statements

The Boards of Trustees/Directors (the “Directors”) of the closed-end funds advised by BlackRock Advisors, LLC (“BlackRock”), (the “Funds”) have the responsibility for the oversight of voting proxies relating to portfolio securities of the Funds, and have determined that it is in the best interests of the Funds and their shareholders to delegate that responsibility to BlackRock as part of BlackRock’s authority to manage, acquire and dispose of account assets, all as contemplated by the Funds’ respective investment management agreements.

BlackRock has adopted guidelines and procedures (together and as from time to time amended, the “BlackRock proxy voting guidelines”) governing proxy voting by accounts managed by BlackRock. BlackRock will cast votes on behalf of each of the Funds on specific proxy issues in respect of securities held by each such Fund in accordance with the BlackRock Proxy voting guidelines; provided, however, that in the case of underlying closed-end funds (including business development companies and other similarly-situated asset pools) held by the Funds that have, or are proposing to adopt, a classified board structure, BlackRock will typically (a) vote in favor of proposals to adopt classification and against proposals to eliminate classification, and (b) not vote against directors as a result of their adoption of a classified board structure.

BlackRock will report on an annual basis to the Directors on (1) a summary of the proxy voting process as applicable to the Funds in the preceding year together with a representation that all votes were in accordance with the BlackRock proxy voting guidelines (as modified pursuant to the immediately preceding paragraph), and (2) any changes to the BlackRock proxy voting guidelines that have not previously been reported.

 

		Public		Page 1 of 1

BlackRock Investment Stewardship Global Principles Effective as of January 2024

---

Contents

 

Introduction to BlackRock			3
Philosophy on investment stewardship			3
Shareholder rights			3
Key themes			5
Boards and directors			6
Auditors and audit-related issues			8
Capital structure, mergers, asset sales, and other special transactions			9
Executive compensation			10
Material sustainability-related risks and opportunities			11
Other corporate governance matters and shareholder protections			13
Shareholder proposals			14
BlackRock’s oversight of its investment stewardship activities			15
Vote execution			16
Voting Choice			17
Conflicts management policies and procedures			17
Securities lending			18
Voting guidelines			19
Reporting and vote transparency			19

The purpose of this document is to provide an overarching explanation of BlackRock’s approach globally to our responsibilities as a shareholder on behalf of our clients, our expectations of companies, and our commitments to clients in terms of our own governance and transparency.

 

BlackRock Investment Stewardship		Global Principles | 2

---

Introduction to BlackRock

BlackRock’s purpose is to help more and more people experience financial well-being. We manage assets on behalf of institutional and individual clients, across a full spectrum of investment strategies, asset classes, and regions. Our client base includes pension plans, endowments, foundations, charities, official institutions, insurers, and other financial institutions, as well as individuals around the world.

Philosophy on investment stewardship

As part of our fiduciary duty to our clients, we consider it one of our responsibilities to promote sound corporate governance as an informed, engaged shareholder on their behalf. At BlackRock, this is the responsibility of the BlackRock Investment Stewardship (BIS) team.

In our experience, sound governance is critical to the success of a company, the protection of investors’ interests, and long-term financial value creation. We take a constructive, long-term approach with companies and seek to understand how they are managing the drivers of risk and financial value creation in their business models. We have observed that well-managed companies will effectively evaluate and address risks and opportunities relevant to their businesses, which supports durable, long-term financial value creation. As one of many minority shareholders, BlackRock cannot – and does not try to – direct a company’s strategy or its implementation.

Shareholder rights

We believe that there are certain fundamental rights attached to shareholding. Shareholders should have the right to:

 

•

Elect, remove, and nominate directors, approve the appointment of the auditor, and amend the corporate charter or by-laws.

 

•

Vote on key board decisions that are material to the protection of their investment, including but not limited to, changes to the purpose of the business, dilution levels and pre-emptive rights, and the distribution of income and capital structure.

 

•

Access sufficient and timely information on material governance, strategic, and business matters to make informed decisions.

In our view, shareholder voting rights should be proportionate to economic ownership—the principle of “one share, one vote” helps to achieve this balance.

Consistent with these shareholder rights, BlackRock monitors and provides feedback to companies in our role as stewards of our clients’ assets. Investment stewardship is how we use our voice as an investor to promote sound corporate governance and business practices that support the ability of companies to deliver long-term financial performance for our clients. We do this through engagement with companies, proxy voting on behalf of those clients who have given us authority, and participating in market-level dialogue to improve corporate governance standards.

Engagement is an important mechanism for providing feedback on company practices and disclosures, particularly where our observations indicate that they could be enhanced to support a company’s ability to deliver financial performance. Similarly, it provides us with an opportunity to hear directly from company boards and management on how they believe their actions are aligned with the long-term

 

BlackRock Investment Stewardship		Global Principles | 3

---

economic interests of shareholders. Engagement with companies may also inform our proxy voting decisions.

As a fiduciary, we vote in the long-term economic interests of our clients. Generally, we support the recommendations of the board of directors and management. However, there may be instances where we vote against the election of directors or other management proposals, or support shareholder proposals. For instance, we may vote against management recommendations where we are concerned that the board may not be acting in the long-term economic interests of shareholders, or disclosures do not provide sufficient information to assess how material, strategic risks and opportunities are being managed. Our regional proxy voting guidelines are informed by our market-specific approach and standards of corporate governance best practices.

 

BlackRock Investment Stewardship		Global Principles | 4

---

Key themes

While accepted standards and norms of corporate governance can differ between markets, in our experience, there are certain globally-applicable fundamental elements of governance that contribute to a company’s ability to create long-term financial value for shareholders. These global themes are set out in this overarching set of principles (the “Principles”), which are anchored in transparency and accountability. At a minimum, it is our view that companies should observe the accepted corporate governance standards in their domestic market and we ask that, if they do not, they explain how their approach better supports durable, long-term financial value creation.

These Principles cover seven key subjects:

 

•

Boards and directors

 

•

Auditors and audit-related issues

 

•

Capital structure, mergers, asset sales, and other special transactions

 

•

Executive compensation

 

•

Material sustainability-related risks and opportunities

 

•

Other corporate governance matters and shareholder protections

 

•

Shareholder proposals

Our regional and market-specific voting guidelines explain how these Principles inform our voting decisions in relation to common ballot items for shareholder meetings in those markets. Alongside the Principles and regional voting guidelines, BIS publishes our engagement priorities which reflect the five themes on which we most frequently engage companies, where they are relevant, as these can be a source of material business risk or opportunity. Collectively, these BIS policies set out the core elements of corporate governance that guide our investment stewardship efforts globally and within each market, including when engaging with companies and voting at shareholder meetings. The BIS policies are applied on a case-by-case basis, taking into consideration the context within which a company is operating.

 

BlackRock Investment Stewardship		Global Principles | 5

---

Boards and directors

We believe that an effective and well-functioning board that has appropriate governance structures to facilitate oversight of a company’s management and strategic initiatives is critical to the long-term financial success of a company and the protection of shareholders’ economic interests. In our view, a strong board can be a competitive advantage to a company, providing valuable oversight of and perspectives to management on the most important decisions in support of long-term financial performance. As part of their responsibilities, board members have a fiduciary duty to shareholders to oversee the strategic direction, operations, and risk management of a company. For this reason, BIS sees engagement with and the election of directors as one of our most important responsibilities. Disclosure of material risks that may affect a company’s long-term strategy and financial value creation, including material sustainability-related factors when relevant, is essential for shareholders to appropriately understand and assess how effectively management is identifying, managing, and mitigating such risks.

The board should establish and maintain a framework of robust and effective governance mechanisms to support its oversight of the company’s strategy and operations consistent with the long-term economic interests of investors. There should be clear descriptions of the role of the board and the committees of the board and how directors engage with and oversee management. We look to the board to articulate the effectiveness of these mechanisms in overseeing the management of business risks and opportunities and the fulfillment of the company’s purpose and strategy.

Where a company has not adequately disclosed and demonstrated that its board has fulfilled these corporate governance and risk oversight responsibilities, we will consider voting against the election of directors who, on our assessment, have particular responsibility for the issues. We assess director performance on a case-by-case basis and in light of each company’s circumstances, taking into consideration their governance, business practices that support durable, long-term financial value creation, and performance. Set out below are ways in which boards and directors can demonstrate a commitment to acting in the long-term economic interests of all shareholders.

Regular accountability through director elections

It is our view that directors should stand for election on a regular basis, ideally annually. In our experience, annual director elections allow shareholders to reaffirm their support for board members and/or hold them accountable for their decisions in a timely manner. When board members are not elected annually, in our experience, it is good practice for boards to have a rotation policy to ensure that, through a board cycle, all directors have had their appointment re-confirmed, with a proportion of directors being put forward for election at each annual general meeting.

Effective board composition

Regular director elections also give boards the opportunity to adjust their composition in an orderly way to reflect developments in the company’s strategy and the market environment. In our view, it is beneficial for new directors to be brought onto the board periodically to refresh the group’s thinking, while supporting both continuity and appropriate succession planning. We consider the average overall tenure of the board, and seek a balance between the knowledge and experience of longer-serving directors and the fresh perspectives of directors who joined more recently. We encourage companies to regularly review the effectiveness of their board (including its size), and assess directors nominated for election in the context of the composition of the board as a whole. In our view, the company’s assessment should consider a number of factors, including each director’s independence and time commitments, as well as

 

BlackRock Investment Stewardship		Global Principles | 6

---

the diversity and relevance of director experiences and skillsets, and how these factors may contribute to the financial performance of the company.

Similarly, there should be a sufficient number of independent directors, free from conflicts of interest or undue influence from connected parties, to ensure objectivity in the decision-making of the board and its ability to oversee management. Common impediments to independence may include but are not limited to:

 

•

Current or recent employment at the company or a subsidiary

 

•

Being, or representing, a shareholder with a substantial shareholding in the company

 

•

Interlocking directorships

 

•

Having any other interest, business, or other relationship which could, or could reasonably be perceived to, materially interfere with a director’s ability to act in the best interests of the company and shareholders.

In our experience, boards are most effective at overseeing and advising management when there is a senior, independent board leader. This director may chair the board, or, where the chair is also the CEO (or is otherwise not independent), be designated as a lead independent director. The role of this director is to enhance the effectiveness of the independent members of the board through shaping the agenda, ensuring adequate information is provided to the board, and encouraging independent director participation in board deliberations. The lead independent director or another appropriate director should be available to meet with shareholders in those situations where an independent director is best placed to explain and contextualize a company’s approach.

There are matters for which the board has responsibility that may involve a conflict of interest for executives or for affiliated directors, or require additional focus. It is our view that objective oversight of such matters is best achieved when the board forms committees comprised entirely of independent directors. In many markets, these committees of the board specialize in audit, director nominations, and compensation matters. An ad hoc committee might also be formed to decide on a special transaction, particularly one involving a related party, or to investigate a significant adverse event.

When nominating directors to the board, we look to companies to provide sufficient information on the individual candidates so that shareholders can assess the capabilities and suitability of each individual nominee and their fit within overall board composition. These disclosures should give an understanding of how the collective experience and expertise of the board, as well as the particular skill-sets of individual directors, aligns with the company’s long-term strategy and business model. Highly qualified, engaged directors with professional characteristics relevant to a company’s business and strategy enhance the ability of the board to add value and be the voice of shareholders in board discussions.

It is in this context that we are interested in diversity in the board room. We see it as a means to promoting diversity of thought and avoiding “group think” when the board advises and oversees management. This position is based on our view that diversity of perspective and thought – in the board room, in the management team, and throughout the company – leads to better long-term economic outcomes for companies. Academic research has revealed correlations between specific dimensions of diversity and effects on decision-making processes and outcomes.¹ In our experience, greater diversity in the board

 

 

¹ For a discussion on the different impacts of diversity see: McKinsey, “Diversity Wins: How Inclusion Matters,” May 2022; Harvard Business Review, “Diverse Teams Feel Less Comfortable – and That’s Why They Perform Better,” September 2016; “Do Diverse Directors Influence DEI Outcomes,” September 2022.

 

BlackRock Investment Stewardship		Global Principles | 7

---

room can contribute to more robust discussions and more innovative and resilient decisions. Over time, greater diversity in the board room can also promote greater diversity and resilience in the leadership team, and the workforce more broadly. That diversity can enable companies to develop businesses that better address the needs of the customers and communities they serve.

We ask boards to disclose how diversity is considered in board composition, including professional characteristics, such as a director’s industry experience, specialist areas of expertise and geographic location; as well as demographic characteristics such as gender, race/ethnicity, and age. 

We look to understand a board’s diversity in the context of a company’s domicile, market capitalization, business model, and strategy. Increasingly, we see the most effective boards nominating directors from diverse backgrounds which helps ensure boards can more effectively understand the company’s customers, employees, and communities. We note that in many markets, policymakers have set board gender diversity goals which we may discuss with companies, particularly if there is a risk their board composition may be misaligned. Self-identified board demographic diversity can usefully be disclosed in aggregate, consistent with local law. We encourage boards to aspire to meaningful diversity of membership, while recognizing that building a strong, diverse board can take time.

Sufficient capacity

As the role and expectations of a director are increasingly demanding, directors must be able to commit an appropriate amount of time to board and committee matters. It is important that directors have the capacity to meet all of their responsibilities - including when there are unforeseen events – and therefore, they should not take on an excessive number of roles that would impair their ability to fulfill their duties.

Auditors and audit-related issues

BlackRock recognizes the critical importance of financial statements, which should provide a true and fair picture of a company’s financial condition. Accordingly, the assumptions made by management and reviewed by the auditor in preparing the financial statements should be reasonable and justified. 

The accuracy of financial statements, inclusive of financial and non-financial information as required or permitted under market-specific accounting rules, is of paramount importance to BlackRock. Investors increasingly recognize that a broader range of risks and opportunities have the potential to materially impact financial performance. Over time, we anticipate investors and other users of company reporting will increasingly seek to understand and scrutinize the assumptions underlying financial statements, particularly those that pertain to the impact of the transition to a low-carbon economy on a company’s business model and asset mix. We recognize that this is an area of evolving practice and note that international standards setters, such as the International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) Board and the International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board (IAASB), continue to develop their guidance to companies.²

In this context, audit committees, or equivalent, play a vital role in a company’s financial reporting system by providing independent oversight of the accounts, material financial and, where appropriate to the jurisdiction, non-financial information and internal control frameworks. Moreover, in the absence of a dedicated risk committee, these committees can provide oversight of Enterprise Risk Management

 

 

² IFRS, “IFRS S1 General Requirements for Disclosure of Sustainability-related Financial Information”, June 2023, and IAASB, “IAASB Launches Public Consultation on Landmark Proposed Global Sustainability Assurance Standard”, August 2023.

 

BlackRock Investment Stewardship		Global Principles | 8

---

systems.³ In our view, effective audit committee oversight strengthens the quality and reliability of a company’s financial statements and provides an important level of reassurance to shareholders.

We hold members of the audit committee or equivalent responsible for overseeing the management of the audit function. Audit committees or equivalent should have clearly articulated charters that set out their responsibilities and have a rotation plan in place that allows for a periodic refreshment of the committee membership to introduce fresh perspectives to audit oversight. We recognize that audit committees will rely on management, internal audit, and the independent auditor in fulfilling their responsibilities but look to committee members to demonstrate they have relevant expertise to monitor and oversee the audit process and related activities.

We take particular note of unexplained changes in reporting methodology, cases involving significant financial restatements, or ad hoc notifications of material financial weakness. In this respect, audit committees should provide timely disclosure on the remediation of Key and Critical Audit Matters identified either by the external auditor or internal audit function.

The integrity of financial statements depends on the auditor being free of any impediments to being an effective check on management. To that end, it is important that auditors are, and are seen to be, independent. Where an audit firm provides services to the company in addition to the audit, the fees earned should be disclosed and explained. Audit committees should have in place a procedure for assessing annually the independence of the auditor and the quality of the external audit process.

Comprehensive disclosure provides investors with a sense of the company’s long-term operational risk management practices and, more broadly, the quality of the board’s oversight. The audit or risk committee, should periodically review the company’s risk assessment and risk management policies and the significant risks and exposures identified by management, the internal auditors or the independent auditors and management’s steps to address them. In the absence of detailed disclosures, we may reasonably conclude that companies are not adequately managing risk.

Capital structure, mergers, asset sales, and other special transactions

The capital structure of a company is critical to shareholders as it impacts the value of their investment and the priority of their interest in the company relative to that of other equity or debt investors. Preemptive rights are a key protection for shareholders against the dilution of their interests.

Effective voting rights are basic rights of share ownership and a core principle of effective governance. Shareholders, as the residual claimants, have the strongest interest in protecting the financial value of the company, and voting rights should match economic exposure, i.e. one share, one vote.

In principle, we disagree with the creation of a share class with equivalent economic exposure and preferential, differentiated voting rights. In our view, this structure violates the fundamental corporate governance principle of proportionality and results in a concentration of power in the hands of a few shareholders, thus disenfranchising other shareholders and amplifying any potential conflicts of interest. However, we recognize that in certain markets, at least for a period of time, companies may have a valid

 

 

³ Enterprise risk management is a process, effected by the entity’s board of directors, management, and other personnel, applied in strategy setting and across the enterprise, designed to identify potential events that may affect the entity, and manage risk to be within the risk appetite, to provide reasonable assurance regarding the achievement of objectives. (Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO), Enterprise Risk Management — Integrated Framework, September 2004, New York, NY, updated in 2017. Please see: https://www.coso.org/SitePages/Home.aspx).

 

BlackRock Investment Stewardship		Global Principles | 9

---

argument for listing dual classes of shares with differentiated voting rights. In our view, such companies should review these share class structures on a regular basis or as company circumstances change. Additionally, they should seek shareholder approval of their capital structure on a periodic basis via a management proposal at the company’s shareholder meeting. The proposal should give unaffiliated shareholders the opportunity to affirm the current structure or establish mechanisms to end or phase out controlling structures at the appropriate time, while minimizing costs to shareholders. 

In assessing mergers, asset sales, or other special transactions, BlackRock’s primary consideration is the long-term economic interests of our clients as shareholders. Boards proposing a transaction should clearly explain the economic and strategic rationale behind it. We will review a proposed transaction to determine the degree to which it can enhance long-term shareholder value. We find long-term investors like our clients typically benefit when proposed transactions have the unanimous support of the board and have been negotiated at arm’s length. We may seek reassurance from the board that the financial interests of executives and/or board members in a given transaction have not adversely affected their ability to place shareholders’ interests before their own. Where the transaction involves related parties, the recommendation to support should come from the independent directors, a best practice in most markets, and ideally, the terms should have been assessed through an independent appraisal process. In addition, it is good practice that it be approved by a separate vote of the non-conflicted parties.

As a matter of sound governance practice, shareholders should have a right to dispose of company shares in the open market without unnecessary restriction. In our view, corporate mechanisms designed to limit shareholders’ ability to sell their shares are contrary to basic property rights. Such mechanisms can serve to protect and entrench interests other than those of the shareholders. In our view, shareholders are broadly capable of making decisions in their own best interests. We encourage any so-called “shareholder rights plans” proposed by a board to be subject to shareholder approval upon introduction and periodically thereafter.

Executive compensation

In most markets, one of the most important roles for a company’s board of directors is to put in place a compensation structure that incentivizes and rewards executives appropriately. There should be a clear link between variable pay and operational and financial performance. Performance metrics should be stretching and aligned with a company’s strategy and business model. BIS does not have a position on the use of sustainability-related criteria in compensation structures, but in our view, where companies choose to include these components, they should be adequately disclosed, material to the company’s strategy, and as rigorous as other financial or operational targets. Long-term incentive plans should encompass timeframes that 1) are distinct from annual executive compensation structures and metrics, and 2) encourage the delivery of strong financial results over a period of years. Compensation committees should guard against contractual arrangements that would entitle executives to material compensation for early termination of their employment. Finally, pension contributions and other deferred compensation arrangements should be reasonable, in light of market practices.

We are not supportive of one-off or special bonuses unrelated to company or individual performance. Where discretion has been used by the compensation committee or its equivalent, we expect disclosure relating to how and why the discretion was used, and how the adjusted outcome is aligned with the interests of shareholders. We acknowledge that the use of peer group evaluation by compensation committees can help ensure competitive pay; however, we are concerned when the rationale for increases in total compensation at a company is solely based on peer benchmarking, rather than a rigorous

 

BlackRock Investment Stewardship		Global Principles | 10

---

measure of outperformance. We encourage companies to clearly explain how compensation outcomes have rewarded performance.

We encourage boards to consider building clawback provisions into incentive plans such that companies could clawback compensation or require executives to forgo awards when compensation was based on faulty financial statements or deceptive business practices. We also favor recoupment from or the foregoing of the grant of any awards by any senior executive whose behavior caused material financial harm to shareholders, material reputational risk to the company, or resulted in a criminal investigation, even if such actions did not ultimately result in a material restatement of past results.

Non-executive directors should be compensated in a manner that is commensurate with the time and effort expended in fulfilling their professional responsibilities. Additionally, these compensation arrangements should not risk compromising directors’ independence or aligning their interests too closely with those of the management, whom they are charged with overseeing.

We use third party research, in addition to our own analysis, to evaluate existing and proposed compensation structures. BIS may signal concerns through not supporting management’s proposals to approve compensation, where they are on the agenda. We may also vote against members of the compensation committee or equivalent board members for poor compensation practices or structures.

Material sustainability-related risks and opportunities

It is our view that well-managed companies will effectively evaluate and manage material sustainability-related risks and opportunities relevant to their businesses. As with all risks and opportunities in a company’s business model, appropriate oversight of material sustainability considerations is a core component of having an effective governance framework, which supports durable, long-term financial value creation.

Robust disclosure is essential for investors to effectively evaluate companies’ strategy and business practices related to material sustainability-related risks and opportunities. Long-term investors like our clients can benefit when companies demonstrate that they have a resilient business model through disclosures thatcover governance, strategy, risk management, and metrics and targets, including industry-specific metrics. The International Sustainability Standards Board (ISSB) standards, IFRS S1 and S2,⁴ provide companies with a useful guide to preparing this disclosure. The standards build on the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures (TCFD) framework and the standards and metrics developed by the Sustainability Accounting Standards Board (SASB), which have converged under the ISSB. We recognize that companies may phase in reporting aligned with the ISSB standards over several years. We also recognize that some companies may report using different standards, which may be required by regulation, or one of a number of voluntary standards. In such cases, we ask that companies highlight the metrics that are industry- or company-specific.

We note that climate and other sustainability-related disclosures often require companies to collect and aggregate data from various internal and external sources. We recognize that the practical realities of data collection and reporting may not line up with financial reporting cycles and companies may require additional time after their fiscal year-end to accurately collect, analyze, and report this data to investors.

 

 

⁴ The objective of IFRS S1 General Requirements for Disclosure of Sustainability-related Financial Information is to require an entity to disclose information about its sustainability-related risks and opportunities that is useful to primary users of general-purpose financial reports in making decisions relating to providing resources to the entity. The objective of IFRS S2 Climate-related Disclosures is to require an entity to disclose information about its climate-related risks and opportunities that is useful to primary users of general-purpose financial reports in making decisions relating to providing resources to the entity.

 

BlackRock Investment Stewardship		Global Principles | 11

---

That said, to give investors time to assess the data, we encourage companies to produce climate and other sustainability-related disclosures sufficiently in advance of their annual meeting, to the best of their abilities.

Companies may also choose to adopt or refer to guidance on sustainable and responsible business conduct issued by supranational organizations such as the United Nations or the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. Further, industry initiatives on managing specific operational risks may provide useful guidance to companies on best practices and disclosures. We find it helpful to our understanding of investment risk when companies disclose any relevant global climate and other sustainability-related standards adopted, the industry initiatives in which they participate, any peer group benchmarking undertaken, and any assurance processes to help investors understand their approach to sustainable and responsible business practices. We will express any concerns through our voting where a company’s actions or disclosures do not seem adequate in light of the materiality of the business risks. 

Climate and nature-related risk

While companies in various sectors and geographies may be affected differently by climate-related risks and opportunities, the low-carbon transition is an investment factor that can be material for many companies and economies around the globe.

We seek to understand, from company disclosures and engagement, the strategies companies have in place to manage material risks to, and opportunities for, their long-term business model associated with a range of climate-related scenarios, including a scenario in which global warming is limited to well below 2°C, considering global ambitions to achieve a limit of 1.5°C. As one of many shareholders, and typically a minority one, BlackRock does not tell companies what to do. It is the role of the board and management to set and implement a company’s long-term strategy to deliver long-term financial returns. 

Our research shows that the low-carbon transition is a structural shift in the global economy that will be shaped by changes in government policies, technology, and consumer preferences, which may be material for many companies.⁵ Yet the path to a low-carbon economy is deeply uncertain and uneven, with different parts of the economy moving at different speeds. BIS recognizes that it can be challenging for companies to predict the impact of climate-related risk and opportunity on their businesses and operating environments. Many companies are assessing how to navigate the low-carbon transition while delivering long-term value to investors. In this context, we encourage companies to publicly disclose, consistent with their business model and sector, how they intend to deliver long-term financial performance through the transition to a low-carbon economy. Where available, we appreciate companies publishing their transition plan.⁶

Consistent with the ISSB standards, we are better able to assess preparedness for the low-carbon transition when companies disclose short-, medium- and long-term targets, ideally science-based where these are available for their sector, for scope 1 and 2 greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) reductions and to demonstrate how their targets are consistent with the long-term financial interests of their investors.

 

 

⁵ BlackRock Investment Institute, “Tracking the low-carbon transition”, July 2023.

⁶ We have observed that more companies are developing such plans, and public policy makers in a number of markets are signaling their intentions to require them. We view transition plans (TPs) as a method for a company to both internally assess and externally communicate long-term strategy, ambition, objectives, and actions to create financial value through the global transition towards a low-carbon economy. While many initiatives across jurisdictions outline a framework for TPs, there is no consensus on the key elements these plans should contain. We view useful disclosure as that which communicates a company’s approach to managing financially material, business relevant risks and opportunities – including climate-related risks – to deliver long-term financial performance, thus enabling investors to make more informed decisions.

 

BlackRock Investment Stewardship		Global Principles | 12

---

While we recognize that regulators in some markets are moving to mandate certain disclosures, at this stage, we view scope 3 emissions differently from scopes 1 and 2, given methodological complexity, regulatory uncertainty, concerns about double-counting, and lack of direct control by companies. We welcome disclosures and commitments companies choose to make regarding scope 3 emissions and recognize these are provided on a good-faith basis as methodology develops. Our publicly available commentary provides more information on our approach to climate-related risks and opportunities.

In addition to climate-related risks and opportunities, the management of nature-related factors is increasingly a component of some companies’ ability to generate durable, long-term financial returns for shareholders, particularly where a company’s strategy is heavily reliant on the availability of natural capital, or whose supply chains are exposed to locations with nature-related risks. We look for such companies to disclose how they manage any reliance and impact on, as well as use of, natural capital, including appropriate risk oversight and relevant metrics and targets, to understand how these factors are integrated into strategy. We will evaluate these disclosures to inform our view of how a company is managing material nature-related risks and opportunities, as well as in our assessment of relevant shareholder proposals. Our publicly available commentary provides more information on our approach to natural capital.⁷

Key stakeholder interests

In order to advance long-term shareholders’ interests, companies should consider the interests of the various parties on whom they depend for their success over time. It is for each company to determine their key stakeholders based on what is material to their business and long-term financial performance. For many companies, key stakeholders include employees, business partners (such as suppliers and distributors), clients and consumers, regulators, and the communities in which they operate.

As a long-term shareholder on behalf of our clients, we find it helpful when companies disclose how they have identified their key stakeholders and considered their interests in business decision-making. In addition to understanding broader stakeholder relationships, BIS finds it helpful when companies consider the needs of their workforce today, and the skills required for their future business strategy. We are also interested to understand the role of the board, which is well positioned to ensure that the approach taken is informed by and aligns with the company’s strategy and purpose.

Companies should articulate how they address material adverse impacts that could arise from their business practices and affect critical relationships with their stakeholders. We encourage companies to implement, to the extent appropriate, monitoring processes (often referred to as due diligence) to identify and mitigate potential adverse impacts and grievance mechanisms to remediate any actual adverse material impacts. In our view, maintaining trust within these relationships can contribute to a company’s long-term success.

Other corporate governance matters and shareholder protections

 

 

⁷ Given the growing awareness of the materiality of these issues for certain businesses, enhanced reporting on a company’s natural capital dependencies and impacts would aid investors’ understanding. In our view, the final recommendations of the Taskforce on Nature-related Financial Disclosures may prove useful to some companies. We recognize that some companies may report using different standards, which may be required by regulation, or one of a number of other private sector standards.

 

BlackRock Investment Stewardship		Global Principles | 13

---

In our view, shareholders have a right to material and timely information on the financial performance and viability of the companies in which they invest. In addition, companies should publish information on the governance structures in place and the rights of shareholders to influence these structures. The reporting and disclosure provided by companies help shareholders assess the effectiveness of the board’s oversight of management and whether investors’ economic interests have been protected. We believe shareholders should have the right to vote on key corporate governance matters, including changes to governance mechanisms, to submit proposals to the shareholders’ meeting, and to call special meetings of shareholders.

Corporate form

In our view, it is the responsibility of the board to determine the corporate form that is most appropriate given the company’s purpose and business model.⁸ Companies proposing to change their corporate form to a public benefit corporation or similar entity should put it to a shareholder vote if not already required to do so under applicable law. Supporting documentation from companies or shareholder proponents proposing to alter the corporate form should clearly articulate how the interests of shareholders and different stakeholders would be impacted as well as the accountability and voting mechanisms that would be available to shareholders. As a fiduciary on behalf of clients, we generally support management proposals if our analysis indicates that shareholders’ economic interests are adequately protected. Relevant shareholder proposals are evaluated on a case-by-case basis.

Shareholder proposals

In most markets in which BlackRock invests on behalf of clients, shareholders have the right to submit proposals to be voted on by shareholders at a company’s annual or extraordinary meeting, as long as eligibility and procedural requirements are met. The matters that we see put forward by shareholders address a wide range of topics, including governance reforms, capital management, and improvements in the management or disclosure of sustainability-related risks.

BlackRock is subject to legal and regulatory requirements in the U.S. that place restrictions and limitations on how BlackRock can interact with the companies in which we invest on behalf of our clients, including our ability to submit shareholder proposals. We can vote, on behalf of clients who authorize us to do so, on proposals put forth by others.

When assessing shareholder proposals, we evaluate each proposal on its merit, with a singular focus on its implications for long-term financial value creation by that company. We believe it is helpful for companies to disclose the names of the proponent or organization that has submitted or advised on the proposal. We consider the business and economic relevance of the issue raised, as well as its materiality and the urgency with which our experience indicates it should be addressed. We would not support proposals that we believe would result in over-reaching into the basic business decisions of the company. We take into consideration the legal effect of the proposal, as shareholder proposals may be advisory or legally binding depending on the jurisdiction, while others may make requests that would be deemed illegal in a given jurisdiction.

Where a proposal is focused on a material business risk that we agree needs to be addressed and the intended outcome is consistent with long-term financial value creation, we will look to the board and management to demonstrate that the company has met the intent of the request made in the shareholder proposal. Where our analysis and/or engagement indicate an opportunity for improvement in the

 

 

⁸ Corporate form refers to the legal structure by which a business is organized.

 

BlackRock Investment Stewardship		Global Principles | 14

---

company’s approach to the issue, we may support shareholder proposals that are reasonable and not unduly prescriptive or constraining on management.

We recognize that some shareholder proposals bundle topics and/or specific requests and include supporting statements that explain the reasoning or objectives of the proponent. In voting on behalf of clients, we do not submit or edit proposals or the supporting statements – we must vote yes or no on the proposal as phrased by the proponent. Therefore, when we vote in support of a proposal, we are not necessarily endorsing every element of the proposal or the reasoning, objectives, or supporting statement of the proponent. We may support a proposal for different reasons from those put forth by the proponent, when we believe that, overall, it can advance our clients’ long-term financial interests. We would normally explain to the company our rationale for supporting such proposals.

Alternatively, or in addition, we may vote against the election of one or more directors if, in our assessment, the board has not responded sufficiently or with an appropriate sense of urgency. We may also support a proposal if management is on track, but we believe that voting in favor might accelerate efforts to address a material risk.

BlackRock’s oversight of its investment stewardship activities

Oversight

BlackRock maintains three regional advisory committees (Stewardship Advisory Committees) for a) the Americas; b) Europe, the Middle East and Africa; and c) Asia-Pacific, generally consisting of senior BlackRock investment professionals and/or senior employees with practical boardroom experience. The regional Stewardship Advisory Committees review and advise on amendments to BIS regional proxy voting guidelines (the Guidelines) covering markets within each respective region. The advisory committees do not determine voting decisions, which are the responsibility of BIS.

In addition to the regional Stewardship Advisory Committees, the Investment Stewardship Global Oversight Committee (Global Oversight Committee) is a risk-focused committee, comprised of senior representatives from various BlackRock investment teams, a senior legal representative, the Global Head of Investment Stewardship (Global Head), and other senior executives with relevant experience and team oversight. The Global Committee does not determine voting decisions, which are the responsibility of BIS.

The Global Head has primary oversight of the activities of BIS, including voting in accordance with the Guidelines, which require the application of professional judgment and consideration of each company’s unique circumstances. The Global Committee reviews and approves amendments to these Principles. The Global Committee also reviews and approves amendments to the regional Guidelines, as proposed by the regional Stewardship Advisory Committees.

In addition, the Global Committee receives and reviews periodic reports regarding the votes cast by BIS, as well as updates on material process issues, procedural changes, and other risk oversight considerations. The Global Committee reviews these reports in an oversight capacity as informed by the Guidelines.

BIS carries out engagement with companies, executes proxy votes, and conducts vote operations (including maintaining records of votes cast) in a manner consistent with the relevant Guidelines. BIS also conducts research on corporate governance issues and participates in industry discussions to contribute to and keep abreast of important developments in the corporate governance field. BIS may

 

BlackRock Investment Stewardship		Global Principles | 15

---

utilize third parties for certain of the foregoing activities and performs oversight of those third parties. BIS may raise complicated or particularly controversial matters for internal discussion with the relevant investment teams and governance specialists for discussion and guidance prior to making a voting decision.

Vote execution

BlackRock votes on proxy issues when our clients authorize us to do so. When BlackRock has been authorized to vote on behalf of our clients, we carefully consider proxies submitted to funds and other fiduciary account(s) (Fund or Funds) for which we have voting authority. BlackRock votes (or refrains from voting) proxies for each Fund for which we have voting authority based on our evaluation of the alignment of the voting items with the long-term economic interests of our clients, in the exercise of our independent business judgment, and without regard to the relationship of the issuer of the proxy (or any shareholder proponent or dissident shareholder) to the Fund, the Fund’s affiliates (if any), BlackRock or BlackRock’s affiliates, or BlackRock employees (see “Conflicts management policies and procedures,” below).

When exercising voting rights, BIS will normally vote on specific proxy issues in accordance with the Guidelines for the relevant market, as well as the Global Principles. The Guidelines are reviewed annually and are amended consistent with changes in the local market practice, as developments in corporate governance occur, or as otherwise deemed advisable by the applicable Stewardship Advisory Committees. BIS analysts may, in the exercise of their professional judgment, conclude that the Guidelines do not cover the specific matter upon which a proxy vote is required or that an exception to the Guidelines would be in the long-term economic interests of BlackRock’s clients.

In the uncommon circumstance of there being a vote with respect to fixed income securities or the securities of privately held issuers, the decision generally will be made by a Fund’s portfolio managers and/or BIS based on an assessment of the particular transactions or other matters at issue.

In certain markets, proxy voting involves logistical issues which can affect BIS’ ability to vote such proxies, as well as the desirability of voting such proxies. These issues include, but are not limited to: i) untimely notice of shareholder meetings; ii) restrictions on a foreigner’s ability to exercise votes; iii) requirements to vote proxies in person; iv) “share-blocking” (requirements that investors who exercise their voting rights surrender the right to dispose of their holdings for some specified period in proximity to the shareholder meeting); v) potential difficulties in translating the proxy; vi) regulatory constraints; and vii) requirements to provide local agents with unrestricted powers of attorney to facilitate voting instructions. We are not supportive of impediments to the exercise of voting rights such as share-blocking or overly burdensome administrative requirements.

As a consequence, BlackRock votes proxies in these situations on a “best-efforts” basis. In addition, BIS may determine that it is generally in the interests of BlackRock’s clients not to vote proxies (or not to vote our full allocation) if the costs (including but not limited to opportunity costs associated with share-blocking constraints) associated with exercising a vote are expected to outweigh the benefit the client would derive by voting on the proposal.

Active portfolio managers have full discretion to vote the shares in the Funds they manage based on their analysis of the economic impact of a particular ballot item on their investors. Portfolio managers may, from time to time, reach differing views on how to maximize economic value with respect to a particular investment. Therefore, portfolio managers may, and sometimes do, vote shares in the Funds under their

 

BlackRock Investment Stewardship		Global Principles | 16

---

management differently from BIS or from one another. However, because BlackRock’s clients are mostly long-term investors with long-term economic goals, ballots are generally cast in a uniform manner. 

Voting Choice

BlackRock offers a Voting Choice program, which provides eligible clients with more opportunities to participate in the proxy voting process where legally and operationally viable. BlackRock Voting Choice aims to make proxy voting easier and more accessible for eligible clients. 

Voting Choice is currently available for eligible clients invested in certain institutional pooled funds in the U.S., UK, Ireland, and Canada that utilize equity index investment strategies, as well as eligible clients in certain institutional pooled funds in the U.S., UK, and Canada that use systematic active equity (SAE) strategies. Currently, this includes over 650 pooled investment funds, including equity index funds and SAE investment funds. In addition, institutional clients in separately managed accounts (SMAs) continue to be eligible for BlackRock Voting Choice regardless of their investment strategies.⁹

As a result, the shares attributed to BlackRock in company share registers may be voted differently depending on whether our clients have authorized BIS to vote on their behalf, have authorized BIS to vote in accordance with a third-party policy, or have elected to vote shares in accordance with their own policy. Agreements with our clients to allow them greater control over their voting, including which policies they have selected, will be treated confidentially consistent with our treatment of similar client agreements.

Conflicts management policies and procedures

BIS maintains policies and procedures that seek to prevent undue influence on BlackRock’s proxy voting activity. Such influence might stem from any relationship between the investee company (or any shareholder proponent or dissident shareholder) and BlackRock, BlackRock’s affiliates, a Fund or a Fund’s affiliates, or BlackRock employees. The following are examples of sources of perceived or potential conflicts of interest:

 

•

BlackRock clients who may be issuers of securities or proponents of shareholder resolutions

 

•

BlackRock business partners or third parties who may be issuers of securities or proponents of shareholder resolutions

 

•

BlackRock employees who may sit on the boards of public companies held in Funds managed by BlackRock

 

•

Significant BlackRock, Inc. investors who may be issuers of securities held in Funds managed by BlackRock

 

•

Securities of BlackRock, Inc. or BlackRock investment funds held in Funds managed by BlackRock

 

•

BlackRock, Inc. board members who serve as senior executives or directors of public companies held in Funds managed by BlackRock

 

 

⁹ Read more about BlackRock Voting Choice on our website.

 

BlackRock Investment Stewardship		Global Principles | 17

---

BlackRock has taken certain steps to mitigate perceived or potential conflicts including, but not limited to, the following:

 

•

Adopted the Guidelines which are designed to advance our clients’ long-term economic interests in the companies in which BlackRock invests on their behalf

 

•

Established a reporting structure that separates BIS from employees with sales, vendor management, or business partnership roles. In addition, BlackRock seeks to ensure that all engagements with corporate issuers, dissident shareholders or shareholder proponents are managed consistently and without regard to BlackRock’s relationship with such parties. Clients or business partners are not given special treatment or differentiated access to BIS. BIS prioritizes engagements based on factors including, but not limited to, our need for additional information to make a voting decision or our view on the likelihood that an engagement could lead to positive outcome(s) over time for the economic value of the company. Within the normal course of business, BIS may engage directly with BlackRock clients, business partners and/or third parties, and/or with employees with sales, vendor management, or business partnership roles, in discussions regarding our approach to stewardship, general corporate governance matters, client reporting needs, and/or to otherwise ensure that proxy-related client service levels are met

 

•

Determined to engage, in certain instances, an independent third-party voting service provider to make proxy voting recommendations as a further safeguard to avoid potential conflicts of interest, to satisfy regulatory compliance requirements, or as may be otherwise required by applicable law. In such circumstances, the independent third-party voting service provider provides BlackRock with recommendations, in accordance with the Guidelines, as to how to vote such proxies. BlackRock uses an independent third-party voting service provider to make proxy voting recommendations for shares of BlackRock, Inc. and companies affiliated with BlackRock, Inc. BlackRock may also use an independent third-party voting service provider to make proxy voting recommendations for:

 

○

public companies that include BlackRock employees on their boards of directors

 

○

public companies of which a BlackRock, Inc. board member serves as a senior executive or a member of the board of directors

 

○

public companies that are the subject of certain transactions involving BlackRock Funds

 

○

public companies that are joint venture partners with BlackRock, and

 

○

public companies when legal or regulatory requirements compel BlackRock to use an independent third-party voting service provider

In selecting an independent third-party voting service provider, we assess several characteristics, including but not limited to: independence, an ability to analyze proxy issues and make recommendations in the economic interest of our clients in accordance with the Guidelines, reputation for reliability and integrity, and operational capacity to accurately deliver the assigned recommendations in a timely manner. We may engage more than one independent third-party voting service provider, in part to mitigate potential or perceived conflicts of interest at a single voting service provider. The Global Committee appoints and reviews the performance of the independent third-party voting service providers, generally on an annual basis.

Securities lending

 

BlackRock Investment Stewardship		Global Principles | 18

---

When so authorized, BlackRock acts as a securities lending agent on behalf of Funds. Securities lending is a well-regulated practice that contributes to capital market efficiency. It also enables funds to generate additional returns while allowing fund providers to keep fund expenses lower.

With regard to the relationship between securities lending and proxy voting, BlackRock cannot vote shares on loan and may determine to recall them for voting, as guided by our fiduciary responsibility to act in our clients’ financial interests. While this has occurred in a limited number of cases, the decision to recall securities on loan as part of BlackRock’s securities lending program in order to vote is based on an evaluation of various factors that include, but are not limited to, assessing potential securities lending revenue alongside the potential long-term financial value to clients of voting those securities (based on the information available at the time of recall consideration).¹⁰ BIS works with colleagues in the Securities Lending and Risk and Quantitative Analysis teams to evaluate the costs and benefits to clients of recalling shares on loan.

In almost all instances, BlackRock anticipates that the potential long-term financial value to the Fund of voting shares would be less than the potential revenue the loan may provide the Fund. However, in certain instances, BlackRock may determine, in our independent business judgment as a fiduciary, that the value of voting outweighs the securities lending revenue loss to clients and would therefore recall shares to be voted in those instances.

Periodically, BlackRock reviews our process for determining whether to recall securities on loan in order to vote and may modify it as necessary.

Voting guidelines

The voting guidelines published for each region/country in which we vote are intended to summarize BlackRock’s general philosophy and approach to issues that may commonly arise in the proxy voting context in each market where we invest. The Guidelines are not intended to be exhaustive. BIS applies the Guidelines on a case-by-case basis, in the context of the individual circumstances of each company and the specific issue under review. As such, the Guidelines do not indicate how BIS will vote in every instance. Rather, they reflect our view about corporate governance issues generally, and provide insight into how we typically approach issues that commonly arise on corporate ballots. As previously discussed, the Guidelines should be read in conjunction with the Principles and engagement priorities. Collectively, these “BIS policies” set out the core elements of corporate governance that guide our investment stewardship efforts globally and within each market, including when engaging with companies and voting at shareholder meetings. The BIS policies are applied on a case-by-case basis, taking into consideration the context within which a company is operating.

Reporting and vote transparency

We are committed to transparency in the stewardship work we do on behalf of clients. We inform clients about our engagement and voting policies and activities through direct communication and through disclosure on our website. Each year we publish an annual report that provides a global overview of our

 

 

¹⁰ Recalling securities on loan can be impacted by the timing of record dates. In the U.S., for example, the record date of a shareholder meeting typically falls before the proxy statements are released. Accordingly, it is not practicable to evaluate a proxy statement, determine that a vote has a material impact on a fund and recall any shares on loan in advance of the record date for the annual meeting. As a result, managers must weigh independent business judgement as a fiduciary, the benefit to a fund’s shareholders of recalling loaned shares in advance of an estimated record date without knowing whether there will be a vote on matters which have a material impact on the fund (thereby forgoing potential securities lending revenue for the fund’s shareholders) or leaving shares on loan to potentially earn revenue for the fund (thereby forgoing the opportunity to vote).

 

BlackRock Investment Stewardship		Global Principles | 19

---

investment stewardship engagement and voting activities and a voting spotlight that summarizes our voting over a proxy year.¹¹ Additionally, we make public our regional proxy voting guidelines for the benefit of clients and the companies in which we invest on their behalf. We also publish commentaries to share our perspective on market developments and emerging key themes.

At a more granular level, on a quarterly basis, we publish our vote record for each company that held a shareholder meeting during the period, showing how BIS voted on each proposal and providing our rationale for any votes against management proposals or on shareholder proposals. For shareholder meetings where a vote might be high profile or of significant interest to clients, we may publish a vote bulletin after the meeting, disclosing and explaining our vote on key proposals. We also publish a quarterly list of all companies with which we engaged and the key topics addressed in the engagement meeting. 

In this way, we help inform our clients about the work we do on their behalf in promoting the governance and business practices that support durable, long-term financial value creation.

 

 

 

 

 

¹¹ The proxy year runs from July 1 to June 30.

 

BlackRock Investment Stewardship		Global Principles | 20

---

 

 

 

 

Want to know more?

blackrock.com/stewardship | contactstewardship@blackrock.com

This document is provided for information and educational purposes only. Investing involves risk, including the loss of principal.

Prepared by BlackRock, Inc.

©2024 BlackRock, Inc. All rights reserved. BLACKROCK is a trademark of BlackRock, Inc., or its subsidiaries in the United States and elsewhere. All other trademarks are those of their respective owners.

 

BlackRock Investment Stewardship Proxy voting guidelines for U.S. securities Effective as of January 2024

---

Contents

 

Introduction			3
Voting guidelines			3
Boards and directors			4
Board structure			6
Board composition and effectiveness			8
Board responsiveness and shareholder rights			9
Auditors and audit-related issues			11
Capital structure proposals			11
Mergers, acquisitions, transactions, and other special situations			12
Executive compensation			14
Material sustainability-related risks and opportunities			17
General corporate governance matters			20
Shareholder protections			23

 

BlackRock Investment Stewardship		Proxy voting guidelines for U.S. securities | 2

---

These guidelines should be read in conjunction with the BlackRock Investment Stewardship Global Principles.

Introduction

BlackRock’s clients depend on us to help them meet their long-term investment goals. Given that the business decisions that companies make have a direct impact on our clients’ long-term investment outcomes and financial well-being, we consider it one of our responsibilities to promote sound corporate governance as an informed, engaged shareholder on their behalf. At BlackRock, this is the responsibility of the BlackRock Investment Stewardship (BIS) team, which serves as a link between BlackRock’s clients and the companies we invest in on their behalf. In BIS’ experience, sound governance is critical to the success of a company, the protection of investors’ interests, and long-term financial value creation.

To that end, BIS takes a long-term approach to stewardship, focused on understanding the drivers of risk and financial value creation in companies’ business models. We do this in three ways:

 

1.

Engaging with companies to build our understanding of a company’s approach to corporate governance and business risks and opportunities.

 

2.

Voting at shareholder meetings on management and shareholder proposals on behalf of clients who have delegated voting authority to BlackRock. Voting is the formal mechanism through which we signal our support for, or concerns about, how companies are serving the long-term financial interests of BlackRock’s clients.

 

3.

Contributing to emerging thinking on stewardship to share our perspectives with clients, policymakers, and others in the corporate governance ecosystem, on topical and emerging stewardship issues that we believe may impact clients’ financial interests as long-term investors.

The following issue-specific proxy voting guidelines (the “Guidelines”) summarize BIS’ philosophy and approach to engagement and voting, as well as our view of governance best practices and the roles and responsibilities of boards and directors for publicly listed U.S. companies. These Guidelines are not intended to limit the analysis of individual issues at specific companies or provide a guide to how BIS will engage and/or vote in every instance. They are to be applied with discretion, taking into consideration the range of issues and facts specific to the company, as well as individual ballot items at shareholder meetings.

Voting guidelines

These guidelines are divided into eight key themes, which group together the issues that frequently appear on the agenda of shareholder meetings:

 

•

Boards and directors

 

•

Auditors and audit-related issues

 

•

Capital structure

 

•

Mergers, acquisitions, asset sales, and other special transactions

 

•

Executive compensation

 

BlackRock Investment Stewardship		Proxy voting guidelines for U.S. securities | 3

---

•

Material sustainability-related risks and opportunities

 

•

General corporate governance matters

 

•

Shareholder protections

Boards and directors

We believe that an effective and well-functioning board that has appropriate governance structures to facilitate oversight of a company’s management and strategic initiatives is critical to the long-term financial success of a company and the protection of shareholders’ economic interests. In our view, a strong board can be a competitive advantage to a company, providing valuable oversight of and perspectives to management on the most important decisions in support of long-term financial performance. As part of their responsibilities, board members have a fiduciary duty to shareholders to oversee the strategic direction, operations, and risk management of a company. For this reason, BIS sees engagement with and the election of directors as one of our most important responsibilities.

Disclosure of material risks that may affect a company’s long-term strategy and financial value creation, including material sustainability-related factors when relevant, is essential for shareholders to appropriately understand and assess how effectively management is identifying, managing, and mitigating such risks.

Where a company has not adequately disclosed and demonstrated that its board has fulfilled these corporate governance and risk oversight responsibilities, we will consider voting against the election of directors who, on our assessment, have particular responsibility for the issues, as indicated below.

Independence

It is our view that a majority of the directors on the board should be independent to ensure objectivity in the decision-making of the board and its ability to oversee management. In addition, all members of audit, compensation, and nominating/governance board committees should be independent. Our view of independence may vary from listing standards.

Common impediments to independence may include:

 

•

Employment as a senior executive by the company or a subsidiary within the past five years

 

•

An equity ownership in the company in excess of 20%

 

•

Having any other interest, business, or relationship (professional or personal) which could, or could reasonably be perceived to, materially interfere with the director’s ability to act in the best interests of the company and its shareholders

We may vote against directors who we do not consider to be independent, including at controlled companies, when we believe oversight could be enhanced with greater independent director representation. To signal our concerns, we may also vote against the chair of the nominating/governance committee, or where no chair exists, the nominating/governance committee member with the longest tenure.

 

BlackRock Investment Stewardship		Proxy voting guidelines for U.S. securities | 4

---

Oversight role of the board

The board should exercise appropriate oversight of management and the business activities of the company. Where we determine that a board has failed to do so in a way that may impede a company’s ability to deliver long-term financial value, we may vote against the responsible committees and/or individual directors.

Common circumstances are illustrated below:

 

•

Where the board has failed to facilitate quality, independent auditing or accounting practices, we may vote against members of the audit committee

 

•

Where the company has failed to provide shareholders with adequate disclosure to conclude that appropriate strategic consideration is given to material risk factors (including, where relevant, material sustainability factors), we may vote against members of the responsible committee, or the most relevant director

 

•

Where it appears that a director has acted (at the company or at other companies) in a manner that compromises their ability to represent the best long-term economic interests of shareholders, we may vote against that individual

 

•

Where a director has a multi-year pattern of poor attendance at combined board and applicable committee meetings, or a director has poor attendance in a single year with no disclosed rationale, we may vote against that individual. Excluding exigent circumstances, BIS generally considers attendance at less than 75% of the combined board and applicable committee meetings to be poor attendance

Sufficient capacity

Where a director serves on an excessive number of boards, which may limit their capacity to focus on each board’s needs, we may vote against that individual. The following identifies the maximum number of boards on which a director may serve, before BIS considers them to be over-committed:

 

		Total # of Public Boards
Public Company Executives1		2
Non-Executive Directors		4

In addition, we recognize that board leadership roles may vary in responsibility and time requirements in different markets around the world. In particular, where a director maintains a Chair role of a publicly listed company in European markets, we may consider that responsibility as equal to two board commitments, consistent with our EMEA Proxy Voting Guidelines. We will take the total number of board commitments across our global policies into account for director elections.

 

 

¹ A public company executive is defined as a Named Executive Officer or Executive Chair.

 

BlackRock Investment Stewardship		Proxy voting guidelines for U.S. securities | 5

---

Risk oversight

Companies should have an established process for identifying, monitoring, and managing business and material risks. Independent directors should have access to relevant management information and outside advice, as appropriate, to ensure they can properly oversee risk. We encourage companies to provide transparency around risk management, mitigation, and reporting to the board. We are particularly interested in understanding how risk oversight processes evolve in response to changes in corporate strategy and/or shifts in the business and related risk environment. Comprehensive disclosures provide investors with a sense of the company’s long-term risk management practices and, more broadly, the quality of the board’s oversight. In the absence of robust disclosures, we may reasonably conclude that companies are not adequately managing risk.

Board Structure

Classified board of directors/staggered terms

Directors should be re-elected annually; classification of the board generally limits shareholders’ rights to regularly evaluate a board’s performance and select directors. While we will typically support proposals requesting board de-classification, we may make exceptions, should the board articulate an appropriate strategic rationale for a classified board structure. This may include when a company needs consistency and stability during a time of transition, e.g., newly public companies or companies undergoing a strategic restructuring. A classified board structure may also be justified at non-operating companies, e.g., closed-end funds or business development companies (“BDC”),² in certain circumstances. However, in these instances, boards should periodically review the rationale for a classified structure and consider when annual elections might be more appropriate.

Without a voting mechanism to immediately address concerns about a specific director, we may choose to vote against the directors up for election at the time (see “Shareholder rights” for additional detail).

Independent leadership

There are two commonly accepted structures for independent leadership to balance the CEO role in the boardroom: 1) an independent Chair; or 2) a Lead Independent Director when the roles of Chair and CEO are combined, or when the Chair is otherwise not independent. 

In the absence of a significant governance concern, we defer to boards to designate the most appropriate leadership structure to ensure adequate balance and independence.³ However, BIS may vote against the most senior non-executive member of the board when appropriate independence is lacking in designated leadership roles.

In the event that the board chooses to have a combined Chair/CEO or a non-independent Chair, we support the designation of a Lead Independent Director, with the ability to: 1) provide formal input into board meeting agendas; 2) call meetings of the independent directors; and 3) preside at meetings of independent directors. These roles and responsibilities should be disclosed and easily accessible. 

 

 

² A BDC is a special investment vehicle under the Investment Company Act of 1940 that is designed to facilitate capital formation for small and middle-market companies.

³ To this end, we do not view shareholder proposals asking for the separation of Chair and CEO to be a proxy for other concerns we may have at the company for which a vote against directors would be more appropriate. Rather, support for such a proposal might arise in the case of overarching and sustained governance concerns such as lack of independence or failure to oversee a material risk over consecutive years.

 

BlackRock Investment Stewardship		Proxy voting guidelines for U.S. securities | 6

---

The following table illustrates examples⁴ of responsibilities under each board leadership model:

 

		Combined Chair/CEO or CEO + Non-independent Chair				Separate Independent Chair
		Chair/CEO or Non- independent Chair		Lead Independent Director		Independent Chair
Board Meetings		Authority to call full meetings of the board of directors		Authority to call meetings of independent directors		Authority to call full meetings of the board of directors
				Attends full meetings of the board of directors
				Briefs CEO on issues arising from executive sessions
Agenda		Primary responsibility for shaping board agendas, consulting with the lead independent director		Collaborates with chair/CEO to set board agenda and board information		Primary responsibility for shaping board agendas, in conjunction with CEO
Board Communications		Communicates with all directors on key issues and concerns outside of full board meetings		Facilitates discussion among independent directors on key issues and concerns outside of full board meetings, including contributing to the oversight of CEO and management succession planning		Facilitates discussion among independent directors on key issues and concerns outside of full board meetings, including contributing to the oversight of CEO and management succession planning

CEO and management succession planning

Companies should have a robust CEO and senior management succession plan in place at the board level that is reviewed and updated on a regular basis. Succession planning should cover scenarios over both the long-term, consistent with the strategic direction of the company and identified leadership needs over time, as well as the short-term, in the event of an unanticipated executive departure. We encourage the company to explain their executive succession planning process, including where accountability lies within the boardroom for this task, without prematurely divulging sensitive information commonly associated with this exercise.

Where there is significant concern regarding the board’s succession planning efforts, we may vote against members of the responsible committee, or the most relevant director.

During a CEO transition, companies may elect for the departing CEO to maintain a role in the boardroom. We ask for disclosures to understand the timeframe and responsibilities of this role. In such instances, we typically look for the board to have appropriate independent leadership structures in place. (See chart above.)

Director compensation and equity programs

Compensation for directors should generally be structured to attract and retain directors, while also aligning their interests with those of shareholders. In our view, director compensation packages that are

 

 

⁴ This table is for illustrative purposes only. The roles and responsibilities cited here are not all-encompassing and are noted for reference as to how these leadership positions may be defined.

 

BlackRock Investment Stewardship		Proxy voting guidelines for U.S. securities | 7

---

based on the company’s long-term value creation and include some form of long-term equity compensation are more likely to meet this goal.

Board composition and effectiveness

Director qualifications and skills

We encourage boards to periodically review director qualifications and skills to ensure relevant experience and diverse perspectives are represented in the boardroom. To this end, performance reviews and skills assessments should be conducted by the nominating/governance committee or the Lead Independent Director. This process may include internal board evaluations; however, boards may also find it useful to periodically conduct an assessment with a third party. We encourage boards to disclose their approach to evaluations, including objectives of the evaluation; if an external party conducts the evaluation; the frequency of the evaluations; and, whether that evaluation occurs on an individual director basis.

Board term limits and director tenure

Where boards find that age limits or term limits are a valuable mechanism for ensuring periodic board refreshment, we generally defer to the board’s determination in setting such limits. BIS will also consider the average board tenure to evaluate processes for board renewal. We may oppose boards that appear to have an insufficient mix of short-, medium-, and long-tenured directors.

In addition, where boards have adopted corporate governance guidelines regarding committee leadership and/or membership rotation, we appreciate clear disclosure of those policies.

Board diversity

As noted above, highly qualified, engaged directors with professional characteristics relevant to a company’s business enhance the ability of the board to add value and be the voice of shareholders in board discussions. In our view, a strong board provides a competitive advantage to a company, providing valuable oversight and contributing to the most important management decisions that support long-term financial performance.

It is in this context that we are interested in diversity in the boardroom. We see it as a means to promoting diversity of thought and avoiding ‘group think’ in the board’s advising of and overseeing management. It can help boards to have deeper discussions and make more resilient decisions. We ask boards to disclose how diversity is considered in board composition, including professional characteristics, such as a director’s relevant industry experience, specialist areas of expertise and geographic location; as well as demographic characteristics such as gender, race/ethnicity, and age. 

We look to understand a board’s diversity in the context of a company’s domicile, market capitalization, business model, and strategy. Increasingly, we see leading boards nominating directors from diverse backgrounds which helps ensure boards can more effectively understand the company’s customers, employees, and communities. Self-identified board demographic diversity can usefully be disclosed in aggregate, consistent with local law. We encourage boards to aspire to meaningful diversity of membership, at least consistent with local regulatory requirements and best practices, while recognizing that building a strong, diverse board can take time. We take a case-by-case approach and consider the size of the board in our evaluation of overall composition and diversity. Business model, strategy, location, and company size may also impact our analysis of board diversity. We acknowledge that these factors

 

BlackRock Investment Stewardship		Proxy voting guidelines for U.S. securities | 8

---

may also play into the various elements of diversity that a board may attract. We look for disclosures from companies to help us understand their approach and do not prescribe any particular board composition.

In the U.S., we believe that boards should aspire to at least 30% diversity of membership,⁵ and we encourage large companies, such as those in the S&P 500, to lead in achieving this standard. In light of market developments,⁶ an informative indicator of diversity for such companies is having at least two women and a director who identifies as a member of an underrepresented group.⁷ We recognize that companies with smaller market capitalizations and in certain sectors may face more challenges. Among these smaller companies, we look for the presence of diversity and take into consideration the steps that companies are taking to ensure diversity on their board.

In order to help investors understand overall diversity, we look to boards to disclose:

 

•

The process by which candidates for board positions are identified, including whether professional firms or other resources outside of incumbent directors’ networks are engaged to identify and/or assess candidates, and whether a diverse slate of nominees is considered for all available board nominations

 

•

How directors’ professional characteristics, which may include domain expertise such as finance or technology, and sector- or market-specific experience, are complementary and link to the company’s long-term strategy

 

•

How diversity, including professional characteristics and demographic factors, is considered in board composition, given the company’s long-term strategy and business model

To the extent that, based on our assessment of corporate disclosures, a company has not adequately explained their approach to diversity in their board composition, we may vote against members of the nominating/governance committee. Our publicly available commentary provides more information on our approach to board diversity.

Board size

We typically defer to the board in setting the appropriate size and believe that directors are generally in the best position to assess the optimal board size to ensure effectiveness. However, we may vote against the appropriate committees and/or individual directors if, in our view, the board is ineffective in its oversight, either because it is too small to allow for the necessary range of skills and experience or too large to function efficiently.

Board responsiveness and shareholder rights

Shareholder rights

 

 

⁵ For a discussion on the different impacts of diversity see: McKinsey, “Diversity Wins: How Inclusion Matters”, May 2022; Harvard Business Review, “Diverse Teams Feel Less Comfortable – and That’s Why They Perform Better”, September 2016; “Do Diverse Directors Influence DEI Outcomes”, September 2022

⁶ Spierings, Merel “Corporate Director Diversity Can Contribute to Board Effectiveness” Harvard Law School Forum on Corporate Governance (Nov. 2023) https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2023/11/24/us-public-company-board-diversity-in-2023/

⁷ Including, but not limited to, individuals who identify as Black or African American, Hispanic or Latinx, Asian, Native American or Alaska Native, or Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander; individuals who identify as LGBTQ+; individuals who identify as underrepresented based on national, Indigenous, religious, or cultural identity; individuals with disabilities; and veterans.

 

BlackRock Investment Stewardship		Proxy voting guidelines for U.S. securities | 9

---

Where we determine that a board has not acted in the best interests of the company’s shareholders, or takes action to unreasonably limit shareholder rights, we may vote against the relevant committees and/or individual directors. Common circumstances are illustrated below:

 

•

The independent Chair or Lead Independent Director and members of the nominating/governance committee, where a board implements or renews a poison pill without shareholder approval

 

•

The independent Chair or Lead Independent Director and members of the nominating/governance committee, where a board amends the charter/articles/bylaws and where the effect may be to entrench directors or to unreasonably reduce shareholder rights

 

•

Members of the compensation committee where the company has repriced options without shareholder approval

If a board maintains a classified structure, it is possible that the director(s) or committee members with whom we have a particular concern may not be subject to election in the year that the concern arises. In such situations, we may register our concern by voting against the most relevant director(s) up for election. 

Responsiveness to shareholders

A board should be engaged with and responsive to the company’s shareholders, including acknowledging voting outcomes for director elections, compensation, shareholder proposals, and other ballot items. Where we determine that a board has not substantially addressed shareholder concerns that we deem material to the business, we may vote against the responsible committees and/or individual directors. Common circumstances are illustrated below:

 

•

The Independent Chair or Lead Independent Director, members of the nominating/governance committee, and/or the longest tenured director(s), where we observe a lack of board responsiveness to shareholders, evidence of board entrenchment, and/or failure to plan for adequate board member succession

 

•

The chair of the nominating/governance committee, or where the chair is not standing for election, the nominating/governance committee member with the longest tenure, where board member(s) at the most recent election of directors have received against votes from more than 25% of shares voted, and the board has not taken appropriate action to respond to shareholder concerns. This may not apply in cases where BIS did not support the initial vote against such board member(s)

 

•

The Independent Chair or Lead Independent Director and/or members of the nominating/governance committee, where a board fails to consider shareholder proposals that (1) receive substantial support, and (2) in our view, have a material impact on the business, shareholder rights, or the potential for long-term value creation

Majority vote requirements

Directors should generally be elected by a majority of the shares voted. We will normally support proposals seeking to introduce bylaws requiring a majority vote standard for director elections. Majority vote standards generally assist in ensuring that directors who are not broadly supported by shareholders are not elected to serve as their representatives. As a best practice, companies with either a majority vote standard or a plurality vote standard should adopt a resignation policy for directors who do not receive support from at least a majority of votes cast. Where the company already has a sufficiently robust

 

BlackRock Investment Stewardship		Proxy voting guidelines for U.S. securities | 10

---

majority voting process in place, we are unlikely to support a shareholder proposal seeking an alternative mechanism.

We note that majority voting may not be appropriate in all circumstances, for example, in the context of a contested election, or for majority-controlled companies or those with concentrated ownership structures.

Cumulative voting

As stated above, a majority vote standard is generally in the best long-term interests of shareholders, as it ensures director accountability through the requirement to be elected by more than half of the votes cast. As such, we will generally oppose proposals requesting the adoption of cumulative voting, which may disproportionately aggregate votes on certain issues or director candidates.

Auditors and audit-related issues

BIS recognizes the critical importance of financial statements to provide a complete and accurate portrayal of a company’s financial condition. Consistent with our approach to voting on directors, we seek to hold the audit committee of the board responsible for overseeing the management of the independent auditor and the internal audit function at a company.

We may vote against the audit committee members where the board has failed to facilitate quality, independent auditing. We look to public disclosures for insight into the scope of the audit committee responsibilities, including an overview of audit committee processes, issues on the audit committee agenda, and key decisions taken by the audit committee. We take particular note of cases involving significant financial restatements or material weakness disclosures, and we look for timely disclosure and remediation of accounting irregularities.

The integrity of financial statements depends on the auditor effectively fulfilling its role. To that end, we favor an independent auditor. In addition, to the extent that an auditor fails to reasonably identify and address issues that eventually lead to a significant financial restatement, or the audit firm has violated standards of practice, we may also vote against ratification.

From time to time, shareholder proposals may be presented to promote auditor independence or the rotation of audit firms. We may support these proposals when they are consistent with our views as described above.

Capital structure proposals

Equal voting rights

In our view, shareholders should be entitled to voting rights in proportion to their economic interests. In addition, companies that have implemented dual or multiple class share structures should review these structures on a regular basis, or as company circumstances change. Companies with multiple share classes should receive shareholder approval of their capital structure on a periodic basis via a management proposal on the company’s proxy. The proposal should give unaffiliated shareholders the opportunity to affirm the current structure or establish mechanisms to end or phase out controlling structures at the appropriate time, while minimizing costs to shareholders. Where companies are unwilling to voluntarily implement “one share, one vote” within a specified timeframe, or are unresponsive

 

BlackRock Investment Stewardship		Proxy voting guidelines for U.S. securities | 11

---

to shareholder feedback for change over time, we generally support shareholder proposals to recapitalize stock into a single voting class.

Blank check preferred stock

We frequently oppose proposals requesting authorization of a class of preferred stock with unspecified voting, conversion, dividend distribution, and other rights (“blank check” preferred stock) because they may serve as a transfer of authority from shareholders to the board and as a possible entrenchment device. We generally view the board’s discretion to establish voting rights on a when-issued basis as a potential anti-takeover device, as it affords the board the ability to place a block of stock with an investor sympathetic to management, thereby foiling a takeover bid without a shareholder vote. 

Nonetheless, we may support the proposal where the company:

 

•

Appears to have a legitimate financing motive for requesting blank check authority

 

•

Has committed publicly that blank check preferred shares will not be used for anti-takeover purposes

 

•

Has a history of using blank check preferred stock for financings

 

•

Has blank check preferred stock previously outstanding such that an increase would not necessarily provide further anti-takeover protection but may provide greater financing flexibility

Increase in authorized common shares

BIS will evaluate requests to increase authorized shares on a case-by-case basis, in conjunction with industry-specific norms and potential dilution, as well as a company’s history with respect to the use of its common shares.

Increase or issuance of preferred stock

We generally support proposals to increase or issue preferred stock in cases where the company specifies the voting, dividend, conversion, and other rights of such stock and where the terms of the preferred stock appear reasonable.

Stock splits

We generally support stock splits that are not likely to negatively affect the ability to trade shares or the economic value of a share. We generally support reverse stock splits that are designed to avoid delisting or to facilitate trading in the stock, where the reverse split will not have a negative impact on share value (e.g., one class is reduced while others remain at pre-split levels). In the event of a proposal for a reverse split that would not proportionately reduce the company’s authorized stock, we apply the same analysis we would use for a proposal to increase authorized stock.

Mergers, acquisitions, transactions, and other special situations

Mergers, acquisitions, and transactions

In assessing mergers, acquisitions, or other transactions – including business combinations involving Special Purpose Acquisition Companies (“SPACs”) – BIS’ primary consideration is the long-term economic interests of our clients as shareholders. Boards should clearly explain the economic and

 

BlackRock Investment Stewardship		Proxy voting guidelines for U.S. securities | 12

---

strategic rationale for any proposed transactions or material changes to the business. We will review a proposed transaction to determine the degree to which it has the potential to enhance long-term shareholder value. While mergers, acquisitions, asset sales, business combinations, and other special transaction proposals vary widely in scope and substance, we closely examine certain salient features in our analyses, such as:

 

•

The degree to which the proposed transaction represents a premium to the company’s trading price. We consider the share price over multiple time periods prior to the date of the merger announcement. We may consider comparable transaction analyses provided by the parties’ financial advisors and our own valuation assessments. For companies facing insolvency or bankruptcy, a premium may not apply

 

•

There should be clear strategic, operational, and/or financial rationale for the combination

 

•

Unanimous board approval and arm’s-length negotiations are preferred. We will consider whether the transaction involves a dissenting board or does not appear to be the result of an arm’s-length bidding process. We may also consider whether executive and/or board members’ financial interests appear likely to affect their ability to place shareholders’ interests before their own, as well as measures taken to address conflicts of interest

 

•

We prefer transaction proposals that include the fairness opinion of a reputable financial advisor assessing the value of the transaction to shareholders in comparison to recent similar transactions

Contested director elections and special situations

Contested elections and other special situations⁸ are assessed on a case-by-case basis. We evaluate a number of factors, which may include: the qualifications and past performance of the dissident and management candidates; the validity of the concerns identified by the dissident; the viability of both the dissident’s and management’s plans; the ownership stake and holding period of the dissident; the likelihood that the dissident’s strategy will produce the desired change; and whether the dissident represents the best option for enhancing long-term shareholder value.

We will evaluate the actions that the company has taken to limit shareholders’ ability to exercise the right to nominate dissident director candidates, including those actions taken absent the immediate threat of a contested situation. BIS may take voting action against directors (up to and including the full board) where those actions are viewed as egregiously infringing on shareholder rights.

We will consider a variety of possible voting outcomes in contested situations, including the ability to support a mix of management and dissident nominees.

Poison pill plans

Where a poison pill is put to a shareholder vote by management, our policy is to examine these plans individually. Although we have historically opposed most plans, we may support plans that include a reasonable “qualifying offer clause.” Such clauses typically require shareholder ratification of the pill and stipulate a sunset provision whereby the pill expires unless it is renewed. These clauses also tend to specify that an all-cash bid for all shares that includes a fairness opinion and evidence of financing does

 

 

⁸ Special situations are broadly defined as events that are non-routine and differ from the normal course of business for a company’s shareholder meeting, involving a solicitation other than by management with respect to the exercise of voting rights in a manner inconsistent with management’s recommendation. These may include instances where shareholders nominate director candidates, oppose the view of management and/or the board on mergers, acquisitions, or other transactions, etc.

 

BlackRock Investment Stewardship		Proxy voting guidelines for U.S. securities | 13

---

not trigger the pill, but forces either a special meeting at which the offer is put to a shareholder vote or requires the board to seek the written consent of shareholders, where shareholders could rescind the pill at their discretion. We may also support a pill where it is the only effective method for protecting tax or other economic benefits that may be associated with limiting the ownership changes of individual shareholders. Lastly, we look for shareholder approval of poison pill plans within one year of adoption of implementation.

Reimbursement of expense for successful shareholder campaigns

We generally do not support shareholder proposals seeking the reimbursement of proxy contest expenses, even in situations where we support the shareholder campaign. Introducing the possibility of such reimbursement may incentivize disruptive and unnecessary shareholder campaigns.

Executive compensation

A company’s board of directors should put in place a compensation structure that balances incentivizing, rewarding, and retaining executives appropriately across a wide range of business outcomes. This structure should be aligned with shareholder interests, particularly the generation of sustainable, long-term value.

The compensation committee should carefully consider the specific circumstances of the company and the key individuals the board is focused on incentivizing. We encourage companies to ensure that their compensation plans incorporate appropriate and rigorous performance metrics, consistent with corporate strategy and market practice. Performance-based compensation should include metrics that are relevant to the business and stated strategy and/or risk mitigation efforts. Goals, and the processes used to set these goals, should be clearly articulated and appropriately rigorous. We use third party research, in addition to our own analysis, to evaluate existing and proposed compensation structures. We hold members of the compensation committee, or equivalent board members, accountable for poor compensation practices and/or structures.

There should be a clear link between variable pay and company performance that drives sustained value creation for our clients as shareholders. Where compensation structures provide for a front-loaded⁹ award, we look for appropriate structures (including vesting and/or holding periods) that motivate sustained performance for shareholders over a number of years. We generally do not favor programs focused on awards that require performance levels to be met and maintained for a relatively short time period for payouts to be earned, unless there are extended vesting and/or holding requirements.

Compensation structures should generally drive outcomes that align the pay of the executives with performance of the company and the value received by shareholders. When evaluating performance, we examine both executive teams’ efforts, as well as outcomes realized by shareholders. Payouts to executives should reflect both the executive’s contributions to the company’s ongoing success, as well as exogenous factors that impacted shareholder value. Where discretion has been used by the compensation committee, we look for disclosures relating to how and why the discretion was used and how the adjusted outcome is aligned with the interests of shareholders. While we believe special awards¹⁰ should be used sparingly, we acknowledge that there may be instances when such awards are appropriate. When evaluating these awards, we consider a variety of factors, including the magnitude and

 

 

⁹ Front-loaded awards are generally those that accelerate the grant of multiple years’ worth of compensation in a single year.

¹⁰ “Special awards” refers to awards granted outside the company’s typical compensation program.

 

BlackRock Investment Stewardship		Proxy voting guidelines for U.S. securities | 14

---

structure of the award, the scope of award recipients, the alignment of the grant with shareholder value, and the company’s historical use of such awards, in addition to other company-specific circumstances.

We acknowledge that the use of peer group evaluation by compensation committees can help calibrate competitive pay; however, we are concerned when the rationale for increases in total compensation is solely based on peer benchmarking.

We support incentive plans that foster the sustainable achievement of results – both financial and non-financial – consistent with the company’s strategic initiatives. Compensation committees should guard against contractual arrangements that would entitle executives to material compensation for early termination of their contract. Finally, pension contributions and other deferred compensation arrangements should be reasonable in light of market practices. Our publicly available commentary provides more information on our approach to executive compensation. 

Where executive compensation appears excessive relative to the performance of the company and/or compensation paid by peers, or where an equity compensation plan is not aligned with shareholders’ interests, we may vote against members of the compensation committee.

“Say on Pay” advisory resolutions

In cases where there is a “Say on Pay” vote, BIS will respond to the proposal as informed by our evaluation of compensation practices at that particular company and in a manner that appropriately addresses the specific question posed to shareholders. Where we conclude that a company has failed to align pay with performance, we will generally vote against the management compensation proposal and relevant compensation committee members.

Frequency of “Say on Pay” advisory resolutions

BIS will generally support annual advisory votes on executive compensation. It is our view that shareholders should have the opportunity to express feedback on annual incentive programs and changes to long-term compensation before multiple cycles are issued. Where a company has failed to implement a “Say on Pay” advisory vote within the frequency period that received the most support from shareholders or a “Say on Pay” resolution is omitted without explanation, BIS may vote against members of the compensation committee.

Clawback proposals

We generally favor prompt recoupment from any senior executive whose compensation was based on faulty financial reporting or deceptive business practices. We appreciate when companies disclose recovery policies in compliance with the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act. We also favor recoupment from or the foregoing of the grant of any awards by any senior executive whose behavior caused material financial harm to shareholders, material reputational risk to the company, or resulted in a criminal investigation, even if such actions did not ultimately result in a material restatement of past results. This includes, but is not limited to, settlement agreements arising from such behavior and paid for directly by the company. We typically support shareholder proposals on these matters unless the company already has a robust clawback policy that sufficiently addresses our concerns.

Employee stock purchase plans

Employee stock purchase plans (“ESPP”) are an important part of a company’s overall human capital management strategy and can provide performance incentives to help align employees’ interests with

 

BlackRock Investment Stewardship		Proxy voting guidelines for U.S. securities | 15

---

those of shareholders. The most common form of ESPP qualifies for favorable tax treatment under Section 423 of the Internal Revenue Code. We will typically support qualified ESPP proposals.

Equity compensation plans

BIS supports equity plans that align the economic interests of directors, managers, and other employees with those of shareholders. Boards should establish policies prohibiting the use of equity awards in a manner that could disrupt the intended alignment with shareholder interests, such as the excessive pledging or heading of stock. We may support shareholder proposals requesting the establishment of such policies.

Our evaluation of equity compensation plans is based on a company’s executive pay and performance relative to peers and whether the plan plays a significant role in a pay-for-performance disconnect. We generally oppose plans that contain “evergreen” provisions, which allow for automatic annual increases of shares available for grant without requiring further shareholder approval; we note that the aggregate impacts of such increases are difficult to predict and may lead to significant dilution. We also generally oppose plans that allow for repricing without shareholder approval. We may oppose plans that provide for the acceleration of vesting of equity awards even in situations where an actual change of control may not occur. We encourage companies to structure their change of control provisions to require the termination of the covered employee before acceleration or special payments are triggered (commonly referred to as “double trigger” change of control provisions). 

Golden parachutes

We generally view golden parachutes as encouragement to management to consider transactions that might be beneficial to shareholders. However, a large potential payout under a golden parachute arrangement also presents the risk of motivating a management team to support a sub-optimal sale price for a company.

When determining whether to support or oppose an advisory vote on a golden parachute plan, BIS may consider several factors, including:

 

•

Whether we determine that the triggering event is in the best interests of shareholders

 

•

Whether management attempted to maximize shareholder value in the triggering event

 

•

The percentage of total premium or transaction value that will be transferred to the management team, rather than shareholders, as a result of the golden parachute payment

 

•

Whether excessively large excise tax gross-up payments are part of the pay-out

 

•

Whether the pay package that serves as the basis for calculating the golden parachute payment was reasonable in light of performance and peers

 

•

Whether the golden parachute payment will have the effect of rewarding a management team that has failed to effectively manage the company

It may be difficult to anticipate the results of a plan until after it has been triggered; as a result, BIS may vote against a golden parachute proposal even if the golden parachute plan under review was approved by shareholders when it was implemented.

We may support shareholder proposals requesting that implementation of such arrangements require shareholder approval.

 

BlackRock Investment Stewardship		Proxy voting guidelines for U.S. securities | 16

---

Option exchanges

There may be legitimate instances where underwater options create an overhang on a company’s capital structure and a repricing or option exchange may be warranted. We will evaluate these instances on a case-by-case basis. BIS may support a request to reprice or exchange underwater options under the following circumstances:

 

•

The company has experienced significant stock price decline as a result of macroeconomic trends, not individual company performance

 

•

Directors and executive officers are excluded; the exchange is value neutral or value creative to shareholders; tax, accounting, and other technical considerations have been fully contemplated

 

•

There is clear evidence that absent repricing, employee incentives, retention, and/or recruiting may be impacted

BIS may also support a request to exchange underwater options in other circumstances, if we determine that the exchange is in the best interests of shareholders.

Supplemental executive retirement plans

BIS may support shareholder proposals requesting to put extraordinary benefits contained in supplemental executive retirement plans (“SERP”) to a shareholder vote unless the company’s executive pension plans do not contain excessive benefits beyond what is offered under employee-wide plans.

Material sustainability-related risks and opportunities

It is our view that well-managed companies will effectively evaluate and manage material sustainability-related risks and opportunities relevant to their businesses. As with all risks and opportunities in a company’s business model, appropriate oversight of material sustainability considerations is a core component of having an effective governance framework, which supports durable, long-term financial value creation.

When assessing how to vote – including on the election of directors and relevant shareholder proposals – robust disclosures are essential for investors to understand, where appropriate, how companies are integrating material sustainability risks and opportunities across their business and strategic, long-term planning. Where a company has failed to appropriately provide the necessary disclosures and evidence of effective business practices to support our assessment, BIS may express concerns through our engagement and voting. As part of this consideration, we encourage companies to produce sustainability-related disclosures sufficiently in advance of their annual meeting so that the disclosures can be considered in relevant vote decisions.

Robust disclosure is essential for investors to effectively evaluate companies’ strategy and business practices related to material sustainability-related risks and opportunities. Long-term investors like our clients can benefit when companies demonstrate that they have a resilient business model through disclosures that cover governance, strategy, risk management, and metrics and targets, including industry-specific metrics. The International Sustainability Standards Board (ISSB) standards, IFRS S1 and

 

BlackRock Investment Stewardship		Proxy voting guidelines for U.S. securities | 17

---

S2,¹¹ provide companies with a useful guide to preparing this disclosure. The standards build on the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures (TCFD) framework and the standards and metrics developed by the Sustainability Accounting Standards Board (SASB), which have converged under the ISSB. We recognize that companies may phase in reporting aligned with the ISSB standards over several years. We also recognize that some companies may report using different standards, which may be required by regulation, or one of a number of voluntary standards. In such cases, we ask that companies highlight the metrics that are industry-or company-specific.

Companies may also disclose any material supranational standards adopted, the industry initiatives in which they participate, any peer group benchmarking undertaken, and any assurance processes to help investors understand their approach to sustainable and responsible business conduct.

Climate risk

While companies in various sectors and geographies may be affected differently by climate-related risks and opportunities, the low-carbon transition is an investment factor that can be material for many companies and economies around the globe.

We seek to understand, from company disclosures and engagement, the strategies companies have in place to manage material risks to, and opportunities for, their long-term business model associated with a range of climate-related scenarios, including a scenario in which global warming is limited to well below 2°C, considering global ambitions to achieve a limit of 1.5°C. As one of many shareholders, and typically a minority one, BlackRock does not tell companies what to do. It is the role of the board and management to set and implement a company’s long-term strategy to deliver long-term financial returns. 

Our research shows that the low-carbon transition is a structural shift in the global economy that will be shaped by changes in government policies, technology, and consumer preferences, which may be material for many companies.¹² Yet the path to a low-carbon economy is deeply uncertain and uneven, with different parts of the economy moving at different speeds. BIS recognizes that it can be challenging for companies to predict the impact of climate-related risk and opportunity on their businesses and operating environments. Many companies are assessing how to navigate the low-carbon transition while delivering long-term value to investors. In this context, we encourage companies to publicly disclose, consistent with their business model and sector, how they intend to deliver long-term financial performance through the transition to a low-carbon economy. Where available, we appreciate companies publishing their transition plan.¹³

Consistent with the ISSB standards, we are better able to assess preparedness for the low-carbon transition when companies disclose short-, medium- and long-term targets, ideally science-based where

 

 

¹¹ The objective of IFRS S1 General Requirements for Disclosure of Sustainability-related Financial Information is to require an entity to disclose information about its sustainability-related risks and opportunities that is useful to primary users of general-purpose financial reports in making decisions relating to providing resources to the entity. The objective of IFRS S2 Climate-related Disclosures is to require an entity to disclose information about its climate-related risks and opportunities that is useful to primary users of general-purpose financial reports in making decisions relating to providing resources to the entity.

¹² BlackRock Investment Institute, “Tracking the low-carbon transition”, July 2023.

¹³ We have observed that more companies are developing such plans, and public policy makers in a number of markets are signaling their intentions to require them. We view transition plans (TPs) as a method for a company to both internally assess and externally communicate long-term strategy, ambition, objectives, and actions to create financial value through the global transition towards a low-carbon economy. While many initiatives across jurisdictions outline a framework for TPs, there is no consensus on the key elements these plans should contain. We view useful disclosure as that which communicates a company’s approach to managing financially material, business relevant risks and opportunities – including climate-related risks – to deliver long-term financial performance, thus enabling investors to make more informed decisions.

 

BlackRock Investment Stewardship		Proxy voting guidelines for U.S. securities | 18

---

these are available for their sector, for scope 1 and 2 greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) reductions and to demonstrate how their targets are consistent with the long-term financial interests of their investors.

While we recognize that regulators in some markets are moving to mandate certain disclosures, at this stage, we view scope 3 emissions differently from scopes 1 and 2, given methodological complexity, regulatory uncertainty, concerns about double-counting, and lack of direct control by companies. We welcome disclosures and commitments companies choose to make regarding scope 3 emissions and recognize these are provided on a good-faith basis as methodology develops. Our publicly available commentary provides more information on our approach to climate-related risks and opportunities.

Natural capital

In addition to climate-related risks and opportunities, the management of nature-related factors is increasingly a component of some companies’ ability to generate durable, long-term financial returns for shareholders, particularly where a company’s strategy is heavily reliant on the availability of natural capital, or whose supply chains are exposed to locations with nature-related risks. We look for such companies to disclose how they manage any reliance and impact on, as well as use of, natural capital, including appropriate risk oversight and relevant metrics and targets, to understand how these factors are integrated into strategy. We will evaluate these disclosures to inform our view of how a company is managing material nature-related risks and opportunities, as well as in our assessment of relevant shareholder proposals. Our publicly available commentary provides more information on our approach to natural capital.¹⁴

Key stakeholder interests

In order to advance long-term shareholders’ interests, companies should consider the interests of the various parties on whom they depend for their success over time. It is for each company to determine their key stakeholders based on what is material to their business and long-term financial performance. For many companies, key stakeholders include employees, business partners (such as suppliers and distributors), clients and consumers, regulators, and the communities in which they operate.

As a long-term shareholder on behalf of our clients, we find it helpful when companies disclose how they have identified their key stakeholders and considered their interests in business decision-making. In addition to understanding broader stakeholder relationships, BIS finds it helpful when companies consider the needs of their workforce today, and the skills required for their future business strategy. We are also interested to understand the role of the board, which is well positioned to ensure that the approach taken is informed by and aligns with the company’s strategy and purpose.

Companies should articulate how they address material adverse impacts that could arise from their business practices and affect critical relationships with their stakeholders. We encourage companies to implement, to the extent appropriate, monitoring processes (often referred to as due diligence) to identify and mitigate potential adverse impacts and grievance mechanisms to remediate any actual adverse material impacts. In our view, maintaining trust within these relationships can contribute to a company’s long-term success.

 

 

¹⁴ Given the growing awareness of the materiality of these issues for certain businesses, enhanced reporting on a company’s natural capital dependencies and impacts would aid investors’ understanding. In our view, the final recommendations of the Taskforce on Nature-related Financial Disclosures may prove useful to some companies. We recognize that some companies may report using different standards, which may be required by regulation, or one of a number of other private sector standards.

 

BlackRock Investment Stewardship		Proxy voting guidelines for U.S. securities | 19

---

Human capital management

A company’s approach to human capital management (“HCM”) is a critical factor in fostering an inclusive, diverse, and engaged workforce, which contributes to business continuity, innovation, and long-term value creation. Consequently, we ask companies to demonstrate a robust approach to HCM and provide shareholders with clear and consistent disclosures to help investors understand how a company’s approach aligns with its stated strategy and business model.

Some components of HCM are consistent across most companies, such as the approach to diversity, equity, and inclusion (“DEI”). We ask companies to disclose their approach to DEI as well as workforce demographics, which are baselined by their responses to the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission’s EEO-1 Survey.

Other relevant HCM factors may be more nuanced to a company’s strategy and business model. Those more nuanced factors may include the company’s approach to workplace safety, compensation, benefits, talent development, and performance management. We ask companies to disclose and provide context on the most relevant HCM factors for their business. 

Our publicly available commentary provides more information on our approach to HCM.

Corporate political activities

Companies may engage in certain political activities, within legal and regulatory limits, in order to support public policy matters material to their long-term strategies. These activities can also create risks, including: the potential for allegations of corruption; certain reputational risks; and risks that arise from the complex legal, regulatory, and compliance considerations associated with corporate political spending and lobbying activity. Companies that engage in political activities should develop and maintain robust processes, including board oversight, to guide these activities and mitigate risks.

We depend on companies to provide accessible and clear disclosures so that investors can easily understand how their political activities support their long-term strategy, including on stated public policy priorities. When presented with shareholder proposals requesting increased disclosure on corporate political activities, BIS will evaluate publicly available information to consider how a company’s lobbying and political activities may impact the company. We will also evaluate whether there is general consistency between a company’s stated positions on policy matters material to their strategy and the material positions taken by significant industry groups of which they are a member. We may decide to support a shareholder proposal requesting additional disclosures if we identify a material inconsistency or determine that further transparency may clarify how the company’s political activities support its long-term strategy. Our publicly available commentary provides more information on our approach to corporate political activities.

General corporate governance matters

IPO governance

Boards should disclose how the corporate governance structures adopted upon a company’s initial public offering (“IPO”) are in shareholders’ best long-term interests. We also ask boards to conduct a regular review of corporate governance and control structures, such that boards might evolve foundational corporate governance structures as company circumstances change, without undue costs and disruption

 

BlackRock Investment Stewardship		Proxy voting guidelines for U.S. securities | 20

---

to shareholders. In our letter on unequal voting structures, we articulate our view that “one vote for one share” is the preferred structure for publicly-traded companies. We also recognize the potential benefits of dual class shares to newly public companies as they establish themselves; however, these structures should have a specific and limited duration. We will generally engage newly listed companies on topics such as classified boards and supermajority vote provisions to amend bylaws, as we think that such arrangements may not be in the best interests of shareholders over the long-term. 

We may apply a one-year grace period for the application of certain director-related guidelines (including, but not limited to, responsibilities on other public company boards and board composition concerns), during which we ask boards to take steps to bring corporate governance standards in line with market norms.

Further, if a company qualifies as an emerging growth company (an “EGC”) under the Jumpstart Our Business Startups Act of 2012 (the “JOBS Act”), we will give consideration to the NYSE and NASDAQ governance exemptions granted under the JOBS Act for the duration such a company is categorized as an EGC. An EGC should have an independent audit committee by the first anniversary of its IPO, with our standard approach to voting on auditors and audit-related issues applicable in full for an EGC on the first anniversary of its IPO.

Corporate form

Proposals to change a corporation’s form, including those to convert to a public benefit corporation (“PBC”) structure, should clearly articulate the stakeholder groups the company seeks to benefit and provide detail on how the interests of shareholders would be augmented or adversely affected with the change to a PBC. These disclosures should also include the accountability and voting mechanisms that would be available to shareholders. We generally support management proposals to convert to a PBC if our analysis indicates that shareholders’ interests are adequately protected. Corporate form shareholder proposals are evaluated on a case-by-case basis.

Shareholder Proposals

When assessing shareholder proposals, BIS evaluates each proposal on its merit, with a singular focus on its implications for long-term financial value creation by that company. We would not support proposals that we believe would result in over-reaching into the basic business decisions of the company. In addition, we believe it helpful for companies to disclose the names of the proponent or organization that has submitted or advised on the proposal. We consider the business and economic relevance of the issue raised, as well as its materiality and the urgency with which our experience indicates it should be addressed.

Where a proposal is focused on a material business risk that we agree needs to be addressed and the intended outcome is consistent with long-term financial value creation, we will look to the board and management to demonstrate that the company has met the intent of the request made in the shareholder proposal. Where our analysis and/or engagement indicate an opportunity for improvement in the company’s approach to the issue, we may support shareholder proposals that are reasonable and not unduly prescriptive or constraining on management.

We recognize that some shareholder proposals bundle topics and/or specific requests and include supporting statements that explain the reasoning or objectives of the proponent. In voting on behalf of clients, we do not submit or edit proposals or the supporting statements – we must vote yes or no on the proposal as phrased by the proponent. Therefore, when we vote in support of a proposal, we are not necessarily endorsing every element of the proposal or the reasoning, objectives, or supporting statement

 

BlackRock Investment Stewardship		Proxy voting guidelines for U.S. securities | 21

---

of the proponent. We may support a proposal for different reasons from those put forth by the proponent, when we believe that, overall, it can advance our clients’ long-term financial interests. We would normally explain to the company our rationale for supporting such proposals.

Alternatively, or in addition, we may vote against the election of one or more directors if, in our assessment, the board has not responded sufficiently or with an appropriate sense of urgency. We may also support a proposal if management is on track, but we believe that voting in favor might accelerate efforts to address a material risk.

Exclusive forum provisions

BIS generally supports proposals to seek exclusive forum for certain shareholder litigation. In cases where a board unilaterally adopts exclusive forum provisions that we consider unfavorable to the interests of shareholders, we will vote against the Independent Chair or Lead Independent director and members of the nominating/governance committee.

Reincorporation

We will evaluate the economic and strategic rationale behind the company’s proposal to reincorporate on a case-by-case basis. In all instances, we will evaluate the changes to shareholder protections under the new charter/articles/bylaws to assess whether the move increases or decreases shareholder protections. Where we find that shareholder protections are diminished, we may support reincorporation if we determine that the overall benefits outweigh the diminished rights.

Multi-jurisdictional companies

Where a company is listed on multiple exchanges or incorporated in a country different from their primary listing, we will seek to apply the most relevant market guideline(s) to our analysis of the company’s governance structure and specific proposals on the shareholder meeting agenda. In doing so, we typically consider the governance standards of the company’s primary listing, the market standards by which the company governs themselves, and the market context of each specific proposal on the agenda. If the relevant standards are silent on the issue under consideration, we will use our professional judgment as to what voting outcome would best protect the long-term economic interests of investors. Companies should disclose the rationale for their selection of primary listing, country of incorporation, and choice of governance structures, particularly where there is conflict between relevant market governance practices.

Adjourn meeting to solicit additional votes

We generally support such proposals unless the agenda contains items that we judge to be detrimental to shareholders’ best long-term economic interests.

Bundled proposals

Shareholders should have the opportunity to review substantial governance changes individually without having to accept bundled proposals. Where several measures are grouped into one proposal, BIS may reject certain positive changes when linked with proposals that generally contradict or impede the rights and economic interests of shareholders.

Other business

We oppose voting on matters where we are not given the opportunity to review and understand those measures and carry out an appropriate level of shareholder oversight.

 

BlackRock Investment Stewardship		Proxy voting guidelines for U.S. securities | 22

---

Shareholder protections

Amendment to charter/articles/bylaws

Shareholders should have the right to vote on key corporate governance matters, including changes to governance mechanisms and amendments to the charter/articles/bylaws. We may vote against certain directors where changes to governing documents are not put to a shareholder vote within a reasonable period of time, particularly if those changes have the potential to impact shareholder rights (see “Director elections”). In cases where a board’s unilateral adoption of changes to the charter/articles/bylaws promotes cost and operational efficiency benefits for the company and its shareholders, we may support such action if it does not have a negative effect on shareholder rights or the company’s corporate governance structure.

When voting on a management or shareholder proposal to make changes to the charter/articles/bylaws, we will consider in part the company’s and/or proponent’s publicly stated rationale for the changes; the company’s governance profile and history; relevant jurisdictional laws; and situational or contextual circumstances which may have motivated the proposed changes, among other factors. We will typically support amendments to the charter/articles/bylaws where the benefits to shareholders outweigh the costs of failing to make such changes.

Proxy access

It is our view that long-term shareholders should have the opportunity, when necessary and under reasonable conditions, to nominate directors on the company’s proxy card.¹⁵

Securing the right of shareholders to nominate directors without engaging in a control contest can enhance shareholders’ ability to meaningfully participate in the director election process, encourage board attention to shareholder interests, and provide shareholders an effective means of directing that attention where it is lacking. Proxy access mechanisms should provide shareholders with a reasonable opportunity to use this right without stipulating overly restrictive or onerous parameters for use, and also provide assurances that the mechanism will not be subject to abuse by short-term investors, investors without a substantial investment in the company, or investors seeking to take control of the board. 

In general, we support market-standardized proxy access proposals, which allow a shareholder (or group of up to 20 shareholders) holding three percent of a company’s outstanding shares for at least three years the right to nominate the greater of up to two directors or 20% of the board. Where a standardized proxy access provision exists, we will generally oppose shareholder proposals requesting outlier thresholds.

Right to act by written consent

In exceptional circumstances and with sufficiently broad support, shareholders should have the opportunity to raise issues of substantial importance without having to wait for management to schedule a meeting. Accordingly, shareholders should have the right to solicit votes by written consent provided that: 1) there are reasonable requirements to initiate the consent solicitation process (in order to avoid the waste of corporate resources in addressing narrowly supported interests); and 2) shareholders receive a minimum of 50% of outstanding shares to effectuate the action by written consent.

 

 

¹⁵ BlackRock is subject to certain regulations and laws in the United States that place restrictions and limitations on how BlackRock can interact with the companies in which we invest on behalf of our clients, including our ability to submit shareholder proposals or elect directors to the board.

 

BlackRock Investment Stewardship		Proxy voting guidelines for U.S. securities | 23

---

We may oppose shareholder proposals requesting the right to act by written consent in cases where the proposal is structured for the benefit of a dominant shareholder to the exclusion of others, or if the proposal is written to discourage the board from incorporating appropriate mechanisms to avoid the waste of corporate resources when establishing a right to act by written consent. Additionally, we may oppose shareholder proposals requesting the right to act by written consent if the company already provides a shareholder right to call a special meeting that offers shareholders a reasonable opportunity to raise issues of substantial importance without having to wait for management to schedule a meeting.

Right to call a special meeting

In exceptional circumstances and with sufficiently broad support, shareholders should have the opportunity to raise issues of substantial importance without having to wait for management to schedule a meeting. Accordingly, shareholders should have the right to call a special meeting in cases where a reasonably high proportion of shareholders (typically a minimum of 15% but no higher than 25%) are required to agree to such a meeting before it is called. However, we may oppose this right in cases where the proposal is structured for the benefit of a dominant shareholder, or where a lower threshold may lead to an ineffective use of corporate resources. We generally think that a right to act via written consent is not a sufficient alternative to the right to call a special meeting.

Consent solicitation

While BlackRock is supportive of the shareholder rights to act by written consent and call a special meeting, BlackRock is subject to certain regulations and laws that place restrictions and limitations on how BlackRock can interact with the companies in which we invest on behalf of our clients, including our ability to participate in consent solicitations. As a result, BlackRock will generally not participate in consent solicitations or related processes. However, once an item comes to a shareholder vote, we uphold our fiduciary duty to vote in the best long-term interests of our clients, where we are authorized to do so.

Simple majority voting

We generally favor a simple majority voting requirement to pass proposals. Therefore, we will generally support the reduction or the elimination of supermajority voting requirements to the extent that we determine shareholders’ ability to protect their economic interests is improved. Nonetheless, in situations where there is a substantial or dominant shareholder, supermajority voting may be protective of minority shareholder interests, and we may support supermajority voting requirements in those situations.

Virtual meetings

Shareholders should have the opportunity to participate in the annual and special meetings for the companies in which they are invested, as these meetings are an opportunity for shareholders to provide feedback and hear from the board and management. While these meetings have traditionally been conducted in-person, virtual meetings are an increasingly viable way for companies to utilize technology to facilitate shareholder accessibility, inclusiveness, and cost efficiencies. Shareholders should have a meaningful opportunity to participate in the meeting and interact with the board and management in these virtual settings; companies should facilitate open dialogue and allow shareholders to voice concerns and provide feedback without undue censorship. Relevant shareholder proposals are assessed on a case-by-case basis.

 

BlackRock Investment Stewardship		Proxy voting guidelines for U.S. securities | 24

---

 

 

Want to know more?

blackrock.com/stewardship | contactstewardship@blackrock.com

This document is provided for information and educational purposes only. Investing involves risk, including the loss of principal.

Prepared by BlackRock, Inc.

©2024 BlackRock, Inc. All rights reserved. BLACKROCK is a trademark of BlackRock, Inc., or its subsidiaries in the United States and elsewhere. All other trademarks are those of their respective owners.

 

---