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 811-10337
Name of Fund: BlackRock New York Municipal Income Trust (BNY)
Fund Address: 100 Bellevue Parkway, Wilmington, DE 19809
Name and address of agent for service: John M. Perlowski, Chief Executive Officer, BlackRock New York Municipal Income Trust, 55 East 52nd Street, New York, NY 10055
Registrant’s telephone number, including area code: (800) 882-0052, Option 4
Date of fiscal year end: 07/31/2012
Date of reporting period: 01/31/2012
Item 1 – Report to Stockholders
|
|
|
January 31, 2012 |
|
|
|
Semi-Annual Report (Unaudited) |
|
|
|
BlackRock California Municipal Income Trust (BFZ) |
|
|
|
BlackRock Florida Municipal 2020 Term Trust (BFO) |
|
|
|
BlackRock Investment Quality Municipal Income Trust (RFA) |
|
|
|
BlackRock Municipal Income Investment Trust (BBF) |
|
|
|
BlackRock New Jersey Investment Quality Municipal Trust Inc. (RNJ) |
|
|
|
BlackRock New Jersey Municipal Income Trust (BNJ) |
|
|
|
BlackRock New York Investment Quality Municipal Trust Inc. (RNY) |
|
|
|
BlackRock New York Municipal Income Trust (BNY) |
|
Not FDIC Insured § No Bank Guarantee § May Lose Value |
|
|
Table of Contents |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Page |
|
|
|
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
Semi-Annual Report: |
|
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
13 |
|
|
|
13 |
|
|
Financial Statements: |
|
|
|
|
14 |
|
|
|
40 |
|
|
|
42 |
|
|
|
44 |
|
|
|
46 |
|
|
|
47 |
|
|
|
55 |
|
|
|
63 |
|
|
|
64 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2 |
SEMI-ANNUAL REPORT |
JANUARY 31, 2012 |
|
|
Early in 2011, global financial market action was dominated by political revolutions in the Middle East and North Africa, soaring prices of oil and other commodities, and natural disasters in Japan resulting in global supply chain disruptions. But corporate earnings were strong and the global economic recovery appeared to be on track. Investors demonstrated steadfast confidence as risk assets, including equities, commodities and high yield bonds, charged forward. Markets reversed sharply in May, however, when escalating political strife in Greece rekindled fears about sovereign debt problems spreading across Europe. Concurrently, global economic indicators signaled that the recovery had slowed. Confidence was further shaken by the prolonged debt ceiling debate in Washington, DC. On August 5th, Standard & Poors downgraded the US governments credit rating and turmoil erupted in financial markets around the world. Extraordinary levels of volatility persisted in the months that followed as Greece teetered on the brink of default, debt problems escalated in Italy and Spain, and exposure to European sovereign bonds stressed banks globally. Financial markets whipsawed on hopes and fears. Macro news flow became a greater influence on trading decisions than the fundamentals of the securities traded, resulting in highly correlated asset prices. By the end of the third quarter, equity markets had fallen nearly 20% from their April peak while safe-haven assets such as US Treasuries and gold had rallied to historic highs.
October brought enough positive economic data to assuage fears of a global double-dip recession. Additionally, European leaders began to show progress toward stemming the regions debt crisis. Investors came back from the sidelines and risk assets rallied through the month. Eventually, a lack of definitive details about Europes rescue plan raised doubts among investors and thwarted the rally at the end of October. The last two months of 2011 saw political instability in Greece, unsustainable yields on Italian bonds, and US policymakers in gridlock over budget issues. Global central bank actions and improving economic data invigorated investors, but confidence was easily tempered by sobering news flow. Sentiment improved in the New Year as investors saw bright spots in global economic data, particularly from the United States, China and Germany. International and emerging markets rebounded strongly through January. US stocks rallied on solid improvement in the domestic labor market and indications from the Federal Reserve that interest rates would remain low through 2014. Nonetheless, investors maintained caution as US corporate earnings began to weaken and a European recession appeared inevitable.
US equities and high yield bonds recovered their late-summer losses and posted positive returns for both the 6- and 12-month periods ended January 31, 2012. International markets, however, experienced some significant downturns in 2011 and remained in negative territory despite a strong rebound at the end of the period. Fixed income securities benefited from declining yields and delivered positive returns for the 6- and 12-month periods. US Treasury bonds outperformed other fixed income classes despite their quality rating downgrade, while municipal bonds also delivered superior results. Continued low short-term interest rates kept yields on money market securities near their all-time lows.
Many of the themes that caused uncertainty in 2011 remain unresolved. For investors, the risks are daunting. BlackRock remains committed to helping you keep your financial goals on track in this challenging environment.
Sincerely,
Rob Kapito
President, BlackRock
Advisors, LLC
BlackRock remains committed to helping you keep your financial goals on track in this challenging environment.
|
Rob Kapito |
|
Total Returns as of January 31, 2012
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6-month |
|
12-month |
|
||
US large cap equities |
|
2.71 |
% |
|
4.22 |
% |
|
(S&P 500® Index) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
US small cap equities |
|
0.22 |
|
|
2.86 |
|
|
(Russell 2000® Index) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
International equities |
|
(10.42 |
) |
|
(9.59 |
) |
|
(MSCI Europe, Australasia, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Far East Index) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Emerging market |
|
(9.56 |
) |
|
(6.64 |
) |
|
equities (MSCI Emerging |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Markets Index) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3-month Treasury |
|
0.02 |
|
|
0.09 |
|
|
bill (BofA Merrill Lynch |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3-Month Treasury |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bill Index) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
US Treasury securities |
|
10.81 |
|
|
18.49 |
|
|
(BofA Merrill Lynch 10- |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year US Treasury Index) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
US investment grade |
|
4.25 |
|
|
8.66 |
|
|
bonds (Barclays |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Capital US Aggregate |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bond Index) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tax-exempt municipal |
|
7.25 |
|
|
14.40 |
|
|
bonds (S&P Municipal |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bond Index) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
US high yield bonds |
|
1.84 |
|
|
5.81 |
|
|
(Barclays Capital US |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Corporate High Yield 2% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Issuer Capped Index) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Past performance is no guarantee of future results. Index performance is shown for illustrative purposes only. You cannot invest directly in an index. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
THIS PAGE NOT PART OF YOUR FUND REPORT |
3 |
|
|
|
|
For the 12-Month Period Ended January 31, 2012 |
One year ago, the municipal bond market was steadily recovering from a difficult fourth quarter of 2010 that brought severe losses amid a steepening US Treasury yield curve and a flood of inflated headlines about municipal finance troubles. Retail investors had lost confidence in municipals and retreated from the market. Political uncertainty surrounding the midterm elections and tax policies exacerbated the situation. These conditions combined with seasonal illiquidity weakened willful market participation from the trading community. December 2010 brought declining demand with no comparable reduction in supply as issuers rushed their deals to market before the Build America Bond program was retired. This supply-demand imbalance led to wider quality spreads and higher yields for municipal bonds heading into 2011.
Demand is usually strong at the beginning of a new year, but retail investors continued to move away from municipal mutual funds in the first half of 2011. From the middle of November 2010, outflows persisted for 29 consecutive weeks, totaling $35.1 billion before the trend finally broke in June 2011. However, weak demand was counterbalanced by lower supply in 2011. According to Thomson Reuters, new issuance was down 32% in 2011 as compared to the prior year. While these technical factors were improving, municipalities were struggling to balance their budgets, although the late-2010 predictions for widespread municipal defaults did not materialize. Other concerns that resonated at the beginning of the year, such as rising interest rates, weakening credits and higher rates of inflation, abated as these scenarios also did not come to fruition.
On August 5th, 2011, Standard & Poors (S&P) downgraded the US governments credit rating from AAA to AA+. While this led to the downgrade of approximately 11,000 municipal issues directly tied to the US debt rating, this represented a very small fraction of the municipal market and said nothing about the individual municipal credits themselves. In fact, demand for municipal bonds increased as severe volatility in US equities drove investors to more stable asset classes. The municipal market benefited from an exuberant Treasury market and continued muted new issuance. As supply remained constrained, demand from both traditional and non-traditional buyers was strong, pushing long-term municipal bond yields lower and sparking a curve-flattening trend that continued through year end. Ultimately, 2011 was one of the strongest performance years in municipal market history. The S&P Municipal Bond Index returned 10.62% in 2011, making municipal bonds a top-performing fixed income asset class for the year.
Supply and demand technicals continued to be favorable in January 2012. Overall, the municipal yield curve flattened during the period from January 31, 2011 to January 31, 2012. As measured by Thomson Municipal Market Data, yields declined by 161 basis points (bps) to 3.17% on AAA-rated 30-year municipal bonds and by 163 bps to 1.68% on 10-year bonds, while yields on 5-year issues fell 117 bps to 0.68%. While the entire municipal curve flattened over the 12-month time period, the spread between 2- and 30-year maturities tightened by 120 bps, and in the 2- to 10-year range, the spread tightened by 124 bps.
The fundamental picture for municipalities continues to improve. Austerity has been the general theme across the country, while a small number of states continue to rely on a kick-the-can approach to close their budget shortfalls, with aggressive revenue projections and accounting gimmicks. The markets technical factors are also improving as demand outpaces supply in what is historically a light issuance period. It has been over a year since the first highly publicized interview about the fiscal problems plaguing state and local governments. Thus far, the prophecy of widespread defaults across the municipal market has not materialized. In 2011, there were fewer municipal defaults than seen in 2010. Throughout 2011 monetary defaults in the S&P Municipal Bond Index totaled roughly $805 million, representing less than 0.48% of the index. BlackRock maintains the view that municipal bond defaults will remain in the periphery and the overall market is fundamentally sound. We continue to recognize that careful credit research and security selection remain imperative amid uncertainty in this economic environment.
|
|
|
Past performance is no guarantee of future results. Index performance is shown for illustrative purposes only. You cannot invest directly in an index. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
4 |
SEMI-ANNUAL REPORT |
JANUARY 31, 2012 |
|
|
|
|
BlackRock California Municipal Income Trust |
|
Trust Overview |
BlackRock California Municipal Income Trusts (BFZ) (the Trust) investment objective is to provide current income exempt from regular US federal income and California income taxes. The Trust seeks to achieve its investment objective by investing primarily in municipal obligations exempt from federal income taxes (except that the interest may be subject to the federal alternative minimum tax) and California income taxes. The Trust invests, under normal market conditions, at least 80% of its assets in municipal obligations that are investment grade quality. The Trust may invest directly in such securities or synthetically through the use of derivatives.
|
|
|
No assurance can be given that the Trusts investment objective will be achieved. |
|
Performance |
For the six months ended January 31, 2012, the Trust returned 21.17% based on market price and 17.19% based on net asset value (NAV). For the same period, the closed-end Lipper California Municipal Debt Funds category posted an average return of 21.02% based on market price and 14.53% based on NAV. All returns reflect reinvestment of dividends. The Trusts discount to NAV, which narrowed during the period, accounts for the difference between performance based on price and performance based on NAV. The following discussion relates to performance based on NAV. The Trusts slightly long duration (sensitivity to interest rate movements) had a positive impact on performance as interest rates generally declined amid the investor flight-to-quality in the US Treasury market. Increased exposure to inverse floating rate instruments (tender option bonds) while the municipal yield curve was historically steep boosted the Trusts income accrual. The Trusts holdings of higher quality essential service revenue bonds contributed positively, as did holdings of select general obligation bonds and school district credits with stronger underlying fundamentals. Additionally, purchases of zero-coupon bonds deemed undervalued added to the Trusts total return.
|
|
|
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. |
|
Trust Information |
|
|
Symbol on New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) |
BFZ |
Initial Offering Date |
July 27, 2001 |
Yield on Closing Market Price as of January 31, 2012 ($15.45)1 |
5.88% |
Tax Equivalent Yield2 |
9.05% |
Current Monthly Distribution per Common Share3 |
$0.0757 |
Current Annualized Distribution per Common Share3 |
$0.9084 |
Economic Leverage as of January 31, 20124 |
39% |
|
|
|
|
1 |
Yield on closing market price is calculated by dividing the current annualized distribution per share by the closing market price. Past performance does not guarantee future results. |
|
|
|
|
2 |
Tax equivalent yield assumes the maximum federal tax rate of 35%. |
|
|
|
|
3 |
The Monthly Distribution per Common Share, declared on March 1, 2012, was increased to $0.0777 per share. The Yield on Closing Market Price, Current Monthly Distribution per Common Share and Current Annualized Distribution per Common Share do not reflect the new distribution rate. The new distribution rate is not constant and is subject to change in the future. |
|
|
|
|
4 |
Represents Auction Market Preferred Shares (AMPS) and tender option bond trusts (TOBs) as a percentage of total managed assets, which is the total assets of the Trust, including any assets attributable to AMPS and TOBs, minus the sum of accrued liabilities. For a discussion of leveraging techniques utilized by the Trust, please see The Benefits and Risks of Leveraging on page 13. |
The table below summarizes the changes in the Trusts market price and NAV per share:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1/31/12 |
|
7/31/11 |
|
Change |
|
High |
|
Low |
|
|||||
Market Price |
|
$ |
15.45 |
|
$ |
13.16 |
|
|
17.40 |
% |
$ |
15.45 |
|
$ |
12.95 |
|
Net Asset Value |
|
$ |
15.76 |
|
$ |
13.88 |
|
|
13.54 |
% |
$ |
15.76 |
|
$ |
13.88 |
|
The following charts show the sector and credit quality allocations of the Trusts long-term investments:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sector Allocations |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||
|
|
1/31/12 |
|
7/31/11 |
|
||||||
County/City/Special District/School District |
|
|
|
37 |
% |
|
|
|
39 |
% |
|
Utilities |
|
|
|
29 |
|
|
|
|
29 |
|
|
Health |
|
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
|
11 |
|
|
Education |
|
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
Transportation |
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
State |
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
Housing |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Credit Quality Allocations5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1/31/12 |
|
7/31/11 |
|
||||||
AAA/Aaa |
|
|
|
10 |
% |
|
|
|
11 |
% |
|
AA/Aa |
|
|
|
70 |
|
|
|
|
67 |
|
|
A |
|
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
|
20 |
|
|
BBB/Ba |
|
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
5 |
Using the higher of Standard and Poors (S&Ps) or Moodys Investors Service (Moodys) ratings. |
|
|
|
|
6 |
Amount rounds to less than 1%. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
SEMI-ANNUAL REPORT |
JANUARY 31, 2012 |
5 |
|
|
|
|
Trust Summary as of January 31, 2012 |
BlackRock Florida Municipal 2020 Term Trust |
|
Trust Overview |
|
|
|
|
No assurance can be given that the Trusts investment objective will be achieved. |
|
Performance |
|
|
|
|
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. |
|
|
Trust Information |
|
|
|
Symbol on NYSE |
BFO |
Initial Offering Date |
September 30, 2003 |
Termination Date (on or about) |
December 31, 2020 |
Yield on Closing Market Price as of January 31, 2012 ($15.41)1 |
4.36% |
Tax Equivalent Yield2 |
6.71% |
Current Monthly Distribution per Common Share3 |
$0.056 |
Current Annualized Distribution per Common Share3 |
$0.672 |
Economic Leverage as of January 31, 20124 |
33% |
|
|
1 |
Yield on closing market price is calculated by dividing the current annualized distribution per share by the closing market price. Past performance does not guarantee future results. |
|
|
2 |
Tax equivalent yield assumes the maximum federal tax rate of 35%. |
|
|
3 |
The distribution rate is not constant and is subject to change. |
|
|
4 |
Represents AMPS and TOBs as a percentage of total managed assets, which is the total assets of the Trust, including any assets attributable to AMPS and TOBs, minus the sum of accrued liabilities. For a discussion of leveraging techniques utilized by the Trust, please see The Benefits and Risks of Leveraging on page 13. |
The table below summarizes the changes in the Trusts market price and NAV per share:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1/31/12 |
|
7/31/11 |
|
Change |
|
High |
|
Low |
|
|||||
Market Price |
|
$ |
15.41 |
|
$ |
13.91 |
|
|
10.78 |
% |
$ |
15.44 |
|
$ |
13.79 |
|
Net Asset Value |
|
$ |
15.77 |
|
$ |
14.94 |
|
|
5.56 |
% |
$ |
15.77 |
|
$ |
14.94 |
|
The following charts show the sector and credit quality allocations of the Trusts long-term investments:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sector Allocations |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
County/City/Special District/School District |
|
44 |
% |
|
46 |
% |
|
Utilities |
|
15 |
|
|
18 |
|
|
State |
|
14 |
|
|
11 |
|
|
Corporate |
|
8 |
|
|
6 |
|
|
Health |
|
8 |
|
|
12 |
|
|
Transportation |
|
8 |
|
|
4 |
|
|
Housing |
|
2 |
|
|
2 |
|
|
Education |
|
1 |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Credit Quality Allocations5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||
|
|
1/31/12 |
|
7/31/11 |
|
||
AAA/Aaa |
|
7 |
% |
|
7 |
% |
|
AA/Aa |
|
48 |
|
|
40 |
|
|
A |
|
20 |
|
|
23 |
|
|
BBB/Baa |
|
12 |
|
|
12 |
|
|
BB/Ba |
|
1 |
|
|
1 |
|
|
Not Rated6 |
|
12 |
|
|
17 |
|
|
|
|
5 |
Using the higher of S&Ps or Moodys ratings. |
|
|
6 |
The investment advisor has deemed certain of these non-rated securities to be of investment grade quality. As of January 31, 2012 and July 31, 2011, the market value of these securities was $6,284,191, representing 5%, and $10,771,005, representing 8%, respectively, of the Trusts long-term investments. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
6 |
SEMI-ANNUAL REPORT |
JANUARY 31, 2012 |
|
|
|
|
Trust Summary as of January 31, 2012 |
BlackRock Investment Quality Municipal Income Trust |
|
Trust Overview |
|
|
|
|
|
No assurance can be given that the Trusts investment objective will be achieved. |
|
On February 10, 2012, the Board of Trustees of the Trust approved a plan of liquidation and dissolution. If approved by shareholders, the liquidation and distribution of substantially all of the Trusts assets is expected to occur by the end of the third quarter of 2012. |
|
Performance |
|
|
|
|
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. |
|
|
|
|
|
Trust Information |
|
|
|
|
|
||||
Symbol on NYSE Amex |
|
|
RFA |
|
Initial Offering Date |
|
|
May 28, 1993 |
|
Yield on Closing Market Price as of January 31, 2012 ($14.00)1 |
|
|
6.00% |
|
Tax Equivalent Yield2 |
|
|
9.23% |
|
Current Monthly Distribution per Common Share3 |
|
|
$0.07 |
|
Current Annualized Distribution per Common Share3 |
|
|
$0.84 |
|
Economic Leverage as of January 31, 20124 |
|
|
39% |
|
|
|
1 |
Yield on closing market price is calculated by dividing the current annualized distribution per share by the closing market price. Past performance does not guarantee future results. |
|
|
2 |
Tax equivalent yield assumes the maximum federal tax rate of 35%. |
|
|
3 |
The distribution rate is not constant and is subject to change. |
|
|
4 |
Represents AMPS and TOBs as a percentage of total managed assets, which is the total assets of the Trust, including any assets attributable to AMPS and TOBs, minus the sum of accrued liabilities. For a discussion of leveraging techniques utilized by the Trust, please see The Benefits and Risks of Leveraging on page 13. |
The table below summarizes the changes in the Trusts market price and NAV per share:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1/31/12 |
|
7/31/11 |
|
Change |
|
High |
|
Low |
|
|||||
Market Price |
|
$ |
14.00 |
|
$ |
11.65 |
|
|
20.17 |
% |
$ |
14.00 |
|
$ |
11.49 |
|
Net Asset Value |
|
$ |
13.28 |
|
$ |
11.77 |
|
|
12.83 |
% |
$ |
13.28 |
|
$ |
11.77 |
|
The following charts show the sector and credit quality allocations of the Trusts long-term investments:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sector Allocations |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
County/City/Special District/School District |
|
21 |
% |
|
19 |
% |
|
Transportation |
|
18 |
|
|
20 |
|
|
Health |
|
18 |
|
|
17 |
|
|
Utilities |
|
17 |
|
|
20 |
|
|
State |
|
10 |
|
|
8 |
|
|
Education |
|
7 |
|
|
7 |
|
|
Housing |
|
6 |
|
|
6 |
|
|
Corporate |
|
2 |
|
|
2 |
|
|
Tobacco |
|
1 |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Credit Quality Allocations5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1/31/12 |
|
7/31/11 |
|
||
AAA/Aaa |
|
11 |
% |
|
8 |
% |
|
AA/Aa |
|
58 |
|
|
57 |
|
|
A |
|
23 |
|
|
25 |
|
|
BBB/Baa |
|
7 |
|
|
8 |
|
|
BB/Ba |
|
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
Not Rated |
|
1 |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
5 |
Using the higher of S&Ps or Moodys ratings. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
SEMI-ANNUAL REPORT |
JANUARY 31, 2012 |
7 |
|
|
|
|
Trust Summary as of January 31, 2012 |
BlackRock Municipal Income Investment Trust |
|
Trust Overview |
|
|
|
|
No assurance can be given that the Trusts investment objective will be achieved. |
|
Performance |
|
|
|
|
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. |
|
|
Trust Information |
|
|
|
Symbol on NYSE |
BBF |
Initial Offering Date |
July 27, 2001 |
Yield on Closing Market Price as of January 31, 2012 ($14.99)1 |
6.03% |
Tax Equivalent Yield2 |
9.28% |
Current Monthly Distribution per Common Share3 |
$0.075375 |
Current Annualized Distribution per Common Share3 |
$0.904500 |
Economic Leverage as of January 31, 20124 |
39% |
|
|
1 |
Yield on closing market price is calculated by dividing the current annualized distribution per share by the closing market price. Past performance does not guarantee future results. |
|
|
2 |
Tax equivalent yield assumes the maximum federal tax rate of 35%. |
|
|
3 |
The distribution rate is not constant and is subject to change. |
|
|
4 |
Represents Variable Rate Demand Preferred Shares (VRDP Shares) and TOBs as a percentage of total managed assets, which is the total assets of the Trust, including any assets attributable to VRDP Shares and TOBs, minus the sum of accrued liabilities. For a discussion of leveraging techniques utilized by the Trust, please see The Benefits and Risks of Leveraging on page 13. |
The table below summarizes the changes in the Trusts market price and NAV per share:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1/31/12 |
|
7/31/11 |
|
Change |
|
High |
|
Low |
|
|||||
Market Price |
|
$ |
14.99 |
|
$ |
12.74 |
|
|
17.66 |
% |
$ |
15.00 |
|
$ |
12.20 |
|
Net Asset Value |
|
$ |
15.19 |
|
$ |
13.40 |
|
|
13.36 |
% |
$ |
15.19 |
|
$ |
13.40 |
|
The following charts show the sector and credit quality allocations of the Trusts long-term investments:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sector Allocations |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
County/City/Special District/School District |
|
26 |
% |
|
19 |
% |
|
Utilities |
|
18 |
|
|
18 |
|
|
Transportation |
|
18 |
|
|
16 |
|
|
Health |
|
17 |
|
|
21 |
|
|
State |
|
11 |
|
|
9 |
|
|
Education |
|
7 |
|
|
7 |
|
|
Corporate |
|
1 |
|
|
8 |
|
|
Tobacco |
|
1 |
|
|
1 |
|
|
Housing |
|
1 |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Credit Quality Allocations5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
AAA/Aaa |
|
9 |
% |
|
10 |
% |
|
AA/Aa |
|
60 |
|
|
55 |
|
|
A |
|
23 |
|
|
26 |
|
|
BBB/Baa |
|
7 |
|
|
7 |
|
|
BB/Ba |
|
|
6 |
|
1 |
|
|
Not Rated |
|
1 |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
5 |
Using the higher of S&Ps or Moodys ratings. |
|
|
6 |
Amount rounds to less than 1%. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
8 |
SEMI-ANNUAL REPORT |
JANUARY 31, 2012 |
|
|
|
|
Trust Summary as of January 31, 2012 |
BlackRock New Jersey Investment Quality Municipal Trust Inc. |
|
Trust Overview |
|
|
|
|
No assurance can be given that the Trusts investment objective will be achieved. |
|
On February 10, 2012, the Board of Trustees of the Trust approved a plan of liquidation and dissolution. If approved by shareholders, the liquidation and distribution of substantially all of the Trusts assets is expected to occur by the end of the third quarter of 2012. |
|
Performance |
|
|
|
|
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. |
|
|
Trust Information |
|
|
|
Symbol on NYSE Amex |
RNJ |
Initial Offering Date |
May 28, 1993 |
Yield on Closing Market Price as of January 31, 2012 ($13.97)1 |
5.63% |
Tax Equivalent Yield2 |
8.66% |
Current Monthly Distribution per Common Share3 |
$0.0655 |
Current Annualized Distribution per Common Share3 |
$0.7860 |
Economic Leverage as of January 31, 20124 |
35% |
|
|
1 |
Yield on closing market price is calculated by dividing the current annualized distribution per share by the closing market price. Past performance does not guarantee future results. |
|
|
2 |
Tax equivalent yield assumes the maximum federal tax rate of 35%. |
|
|
3 |
The distribution rate is not constant and is subject to change. |
|
|
4 |
Represents AMPS and TOBs as a percentage of total managed assets, which is the total assets of the Trust, including any assets attributable to AMPS and TOBs, minus the sum of accrued liabilities. For a discussion of leveraging techniques utilized by the Trust, please see The Benefits and Risks of Leveraging on page 13. |
The table below summarizes the changes in the Trusts market price and NAV per share:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1/31/12 |
|
7/31/11 |
|
Change |
|
High |
|
Low |
|
|||||
Market Price |
|
$ |
13.97 |
|
$ |
12.02 |
|
|
16.22 |
% |
$ |
13.97 |
|
$ |
11.85 |
|
Net Asset Value |
|
$ |
13.88 |
|
$ |
12.32 |
|
|
12.66 |
% |
$ |
13.88 |
|
$ |
12.32 |
|
The following charts show the sector and credit quality allocations of the Trusts long-term investments:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sector Allocations |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
State |
|
26 |
% |
|
17 |
% |
|
Education |
|
17 |
|
|
19 |
|
|
County/City/Special District/School District |
|
17 |
|
|
13 |
|
|
Transportation |
|
15 |
|
|
18 |
|
|
Health |
|
11 |
|
|
11 |
|
|
Housing |
|
7 |
|
|
9 |
|
|
Corporate |
|
7 |
|
|
10 |
|
|
Utilities |
|
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
Tobacco |
|
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Credit Quality Allocations5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
AA/Aa |
|
44 |
% |
|
39 |
% |
|
A |
|
41 |
|
|
42 |
|
|
BBB/Baa |
|
5 |
|
|
10 |
|
|
BB/Ba |
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
B |
|
5 |
|
|
5 |
|
|
Not Rated6 |
|
4 |
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
|
5 |
Using the higher of S&Ps or Moodys ratings. |
|
|
6 |
The investment advisor has deemed certain of these non-rated securities to be of investment grade quality. As of January 31, 2012 and July 31, 2011, the market value of these securities was $511,455, representing 2%, and $884,636, representing 4%, respectively, of the Trusts long-term investments. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
SEMI-ANNUAL REPORT |
JANUARY 31, 2012 |
9 |
|
|
|
|
Trust Summary as of January 31, 2012 |
BlackRock New Jersey Municipal Income Trust |
|
Trust Overview |
|
|
|
|
No assurance can be given that the Trusts investment objective will be achieved. |
|
Performance |
|
|
|
|
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. |
|
|
|
|
|
Trust Information |
|
|
|
|
|
||||
Symbol on NYSE |
|
|
BNJ |
|
Initial Offering Date |
|
|
July 27, 2001 |
|
Yield on Closing Market Price as of January 31, 2012 ($16.75)1 |
|
|
5.67% |
|
Tax Equivalent Yield2 |
|
|
8.72% |
|
Current Monthly Distribution per Common Share3 |
|
|
$0.0791 |
|
Current Annualized Distribution per Common Share3 |
|
|
$0.9492 |
|
Economic Leverage as of January 31, 20124 |
|
|
36% |
|
|
|
1 |
Yield on closing market price is calculated by dividing the current annualized distribution per share by the closing market price. Past performance does not guarantee future results. |
|
|
2 |
Tax equivalent yield assumes the maximum federal tax rate of 35%. |
|
|
3 |
The distribution rate is not constant and is subject to change. |
|
|
4 |
Represents AMPS and TOBs as a percentage of total managed assets, which is the total assets of the Trust, including any assets attributable to AMPS and TOBs, minus the sum of accrued liabilities. For a discussion of leveraging techniques utilized by the Trust, please see The Benefits and Risks of Leveraging on page 13. |
The table below summarizes the changes in the Trusts market price and NAV per share:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1/31/12 |
|
7/31/11 |
|
Change |
|
High |
|
Low |
|
|||||
Market Price |
|
$ |
16.75 |
|
$ |
14.10 |
|
|
18.79 |
% |
$ |
16.79 |
|
$ |
13.34 |
|
Net Asset Value |
|
$ |
15.74 |
|
$ |
14.07 |
|
|
11.87 |
% |
$ |
15.74 |
|
$ |
14.07 |
|
The following charts show the sector and credit quality allocations of the Trusts long-term investments:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sector Allocations |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
State |
|
23 |
% |
|
22 |
% |
|
County/City/Special District/School District |
|
19 |
|
|
12 |
|
|
Transportation |
|
16 |
|
|
18 |
|
|
Health |
|
14 |
|
|
15 |
|
|
Education |
|
12 |
|
|
11 |
|
|
Housing |
|
10 |
|
|
13 |
|
|
Corporate |
|
5 |
|
|
7 |
|
|
Utilities |
|
1 |
|
|
1 |
|
|
Tobacco |
|
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Credit Quality Allocations5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||
AAA/Aaa |
|
7 |
% |
|
5 |
% |
|
AA/Aa |
|
36 |
|
|
33 |
|
|
A |
|
32 |
|
|
33 |
|
|
BBB/Baa |
|
12 |
|
|
12 |
|
|
BB/Ba |
|
4 |
|
|
5 |
|
|
B |
|
3 |
|
|
3 |
|
|
Not Rated6 |
|
6 |
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
|
5 |
Using the higher of S&Ps or Moodys ratings. |
|
|
6 |
The investment advisor has deemed certain of these non-rated securities to be of investment grade quality. As of January 31, 2012 and July 31, 2011, the market value of these securities was $8,545,602, representing 5%, and $13,046,133, representing 8%, respectively, of the Trusts long-term investments. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
10 |
SEMI-ANNUAL REPORT |
JANUARY 31, 2012 |
|
|
|
|
Trust Summary as of January 31, 2012 |
BlackRock New York Investment Quality Municipal Trust Inc. |
|
|
|
|
Trust Overview |
|
No assurance can be given that the Trusts investment objective will be achieved.
On February 10, 2012, the Board of Trustees of the Trust approved a plan of liquidation and dissolution. If approved by shareholders, the liquidation and distribution of substantially all of the Trusts assets is expected to occur by the end of the third quarter of 2012.
|
Performance |
|
|
|
|
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. |
|
|
Trust Information |
|
|
|
Symbol on NYSE Amex |
RNY |
Initial Offering Date |
May 28, 1993 |
Yield on Closing Market Price as of January 31, 2012 ($15.27)1 |
5.74% |
Tax Equivalent Yield2 |
8.83% |
Current Monthly Distribution per Common Share3 |
$0.073 |
Current Annualized Distribution per Common Share3 |
$0.876 |
Economic Leverage as of January 31, 20124 |
37% |
|
|
|
|
1 |
Yield on closing market price is calculated by dividing the current annualized distribution per share by the closing market price. Past performance does not guarantee future results. |
|
|
|
|
2 |
Tax equivalent yield assumes the maximum federal tax rate of 35%. |
|
|
|
|
3 |
The distribution rate is not constant and is subject to change. |
|
|
|
|
4 |
Represents AMPS and TOBs as a percentage of total managed assets, which is the total assets of the Trust, including any assets attributable to AMPS and TOBs, minus the sum of accrued liabilities. For a discussion of leveraging techniques utilized by the Trust, please see The Benefits and Risks of Leveraging on page 13. |
|
|
|
The table below summarizes the changes in the Trusts market price and NAV per share: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1/31/12 |
|
7/31/11 |
|
Change |
|
High |
|
Low |
|
|||||
Market Price |
|
$ |
15.27 |
|
$ |
13.49 |
|
|
13.19 |
% |
$ |
15.35 |
|
$ |
13.43 |
|
Net Asset Value |
|
$ |
15.13 |
|
$ |
13.75 |
|
|
10.04 |
% |
$ |
15.13 |
|
$ |
13.75 |
|
The following charts show the sector and credit quality allocations of the Trusts long-term investments:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sector Allocations |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
County/City/Special District/School District |
|
24 |
% |
|
25 |
% |
|
Health |
|
15 |
|
|
14 |
|
|
State |
|
14 |
|
|
9 |
|
|
Utilities |
|
13 |
|
|
16 |
|
|
Corporate |
|
11 |
|
|
11 |
|
|
Education |
|
10 |
|
|
13 |
|
|
Transportation |
|
7 |
|
|
3 |
|
|
Housing |
|
6 |
|
|
7 |
|
|
Tobacco |
|
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Credit Quality Allocations5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
AAA/Aaa |
|
13 |
% |
|
17 |
% |
|
AA/Aa |
|
31 |
|
|
26 |
|
|
A |
|
35 |
|
|
28 |
|
|
BBB/Baa |
|
9 |
|
|
14 |
|
|
BB/Ba |
|
5 |
|
|
6 |
|
|
B |
|
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
Not Rated |
|
7 |
|
|
5 |
6 |
|
|
|
|
|
5 |
Using the higher of S&Ps or Moodys ratings. |
|
|
|
|
6 |
The investment advisor has deemed certain of these non-rated securities to be of investment grade quality. As of July 31, 2011, the market value of these securities was $1,312,653, representing 2% of the Trusts long-term investments. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
SEMI-ANNUAL REPORT |
JANUARY 31, 2012 |
11 |
|
|
|
|
Trust Summary as of January 31, 2012 |
BlackRock New York Municipal Income Trust |
|
Trust Overview |
|
|
No assurance can be given that the Trusts investment objective will be achieved. |
|
|
Performance |
|
|
|
|
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. |
|
|
Trust Information |
|
|
|
Symbol on NYSE |
BNY |
Initial Offering Date |
July 27, 2001 |
Yield on Closing Market Price as of January 31, 2012 ($16.12)1 |
6.14% |
Tax Equivalent Yield2 |
9.45% |
Current Monthly Distribution per Common Share3 |
$0.0825 |
Current Annualized Distribution per Common Share3 |
$0.9900 |
Economic Leverage as of January 31, 20124 |
38% |
|
|
|
|
1 |
Yield on closing market price is calculated by dividing the current annualized distribution per share by the closing market price. Past performance does not guarantee future results. |
|
|
|
|
2 |
Tax equivalent yield assumes the maximum federal tax rate of 35%. |
|
|
|
|
3 |
The distribution rate is not constant and is subject to change. |
|
|
|
|
4 |
Represents AMPS and TOBs as a percentage of total managed assets, which is the total assets of the Trust, including any assets attributable to AMPS and TOBs, minus the sum of accrued liabilities. For a discussion of leveraging techniques utilized by the Trust, please see The Benefits and Risks of Leveraging on page 13. |
The table below summarizes the changes in the Trusts market price and NAV per share:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1/31/12 |
|
7/31/11 |
|
Change |
|
High |
|
Low |
|
|||||
Market Price |
|
$ |
16.12 |
|
$ |
14.20 |
|
|
13.52 |
% |
$ |
16.15 |
|
$ |
13.99 |
|
Net Asset Value |
|
$ |
14.95 |
|
$ |
13.87 |
|
|
7.79 |
% |
$ |
14.95 |
|
$ |
13.87 |
|
The following charts show the sector and credit quality allocations of the Trusts long-term investments:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sector Allocations |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
County/City/Special District/School District |
|
18 |
% |
|
18 |
% |
|
Transportation |
|
17 |
|
|
17 |
|
|
Education |
|
16 |
|
|
17 |
|
|
Utilities |
|
12 |
|
|
10 |
|
|
Corporate |
|
10 |
|
|
11 |
|
|
Housing |
|
9 |
|
|
10 |
|
|
Health |
|
8 |
|
|
6 |
|
|
State |
|
7 |
|
|
7 |
|
|
Tobacco |
|
3 |
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Credit Quality Allocations5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
AAA/Aaa |
|
11 |
% |
|
11 |
% |
|
AA/Aa |
|
37 |
|
|
33 |
|
|
A |
|
29 |
|
|
27 |
|
|
BBB/Baa |
|
16 |
|
|
20 |
|
|
BB/Ba |
|
1 |
|
|
2 |
|
|
B |
|
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
Not Rated6 |
|
6 |
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
5 |
Using the higher of S&Ps or Moodys ratings. |
|
|
|
|
6 |
The investment advisor has deemed certain of these non-rated securities to be of investment grade quality. As of January 31, 2012 and July 31, 2011, the market value of these securities was $2,501,000, representing 1%, and $11,121,550 representing 4%, respectively, of the Trusts long-term investments. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
12 |
SEMI-ANNUAL REPORT |
JANUARY 31, 2012 |
|
|
The Trusts may utilize leverage to seek to enhance the yield and NAV of their common shares (Common Shares). However, these objectives cannot be achieved in all interest rate environments.
To obtain leverage, the Trusts issue Auction Market Preferred Securities (AMPS), Variable Rate Demand Preferred Shares (VRDP Shares) or Variable Rate Muni Term Preferred Shares (VMTP Shares) (collectively, Preferred Shares). Preferred Shares pay dividends at prevailing short-term interest rates, and the Trusts invest the proceeds in long-term municipal bonds. In general, the concept of leveraging is based on the premise that the financing cost of assets to be obtained from leverage, which will be based on short-term interest rates, will normally be lower than the income earned by each Trust on its longer-term portfolio investments. To the extent that the total assets of each Trust (including the assets obtained from leverage) are invested in higher-yielding portfolio investments, each Trusts shareholders will benefit from the incremental net income.
To illustrate these concepts, assume a Trusts Common Shares capitalization is $100 million and it issues Preferred Shares for an additional $50 million, creating a total value of $150 million available for investment in long-term municipal bonds. If prevailing short-term interest rates are 3% and long-term interest rates are 6%, the yield curve has a strongly positive slope. In this case, the Trust pays dividends on the $50 million of Preferred Shares based on the lower short-term interest rates. At the same time, the securities purchased by the Trust with assets received from the Preferred Shares issuance earn income based on long-term interest rates. In this case, the dividends paid to holders of Preferred Shares (Preferred Shareholders) are significantly lower than the income earned on the Trusts long-term investments, and therefore the Common Shareholders are the beneficiaries of the incremental net income.
If short-term interest rates rise, narrowing the differential between short-term and long-term interest rates, the incremental net income pickup will be reduced or eliminated completely. Furthermore, if prevailing short-term interest rates rise above long-term interest rates, the yield curve has a negative slope. In this case, the Trust pays higher short-term interest rates whereas the Trusts total portfolio earns income based on lower long-term interest rates.
Furthermore, the value of the Trusts 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 redemption value of the Trusts Preferred Shares does not fluctuate in relation to interest rates. As a result, changes in interest rates can influence the Trusts NAVs positively or negatively in addition to the impact on Trust performance from leverage from Preferred Shares discussed above.
The Trusts may also leverage their assets through the use of tender option bond trusts (TOBs), as described in Note 1 of the Notes to Financial Statements. TOB investments generally will provide the Trusts with economic benefits in periods of declining short-term interest rates, but expose the Trusts to risks during periods of rising short-term interest rates similar to those associated with Preferred Shares issued by the Trusts, as described above. Additionally, fluctuations in the market value of municipal bonds deposited into the TOB trust may adversely affect each Trusts NAV per share.
The use of leverage may enhance opportunities for increased income to the Trusts and Common Shareholders, but as described above, it also creates risks as short- or long-term interest rates fluctuate. Leverage also will generally cause greater changes in the Trusts NAVs, market prices and dividend rates than comparable portfolios without leverage. If the income derived from securities purchased with assets received from leverage exceeds the cost of leverage, the Trusts net income will be greater than if leverage had not been used. Conversely, if the income from the securities purchased is not sufficient to cover the cost of leverage, each Trusts net income will be less than if leverage had not been used, and therefore the amount available for distribution to Common Shareholders will be reduced. Each 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 a Trust to incur losses. The use of leverage may limit each Trusts ability to invest in certain types of securities or use certain types of hedging strategies, such as in the case of certain restrictions imposed by rating agencies that rate the Preferred Shares issued by the Trusts. Each Trust will incur expenses in connection with the use of leverage, all of which are borne by Common Shareholders and may reduce income to the Common Shares.
Under the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended (the 1940 Act), the Trusts are permitted to issue senior securities in the form of equity securities (e.g., Preferred Shares) up to 50% of their total managed assets. In addition, each Trust voluntarily limits its economic leverage to 50% of its total managed assets for Trusts with AMPS or 45% for Trusts with VRDPs. As of January 31, 2012, the Trusts had economic leverage from Preferred Shares and/or TOBs as a percentage of their total managed assets as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Percent
of |
|
||
BFZ |
|
39 |
% |
|
|
BFO |
|
33 |
% |
|
|
RFA |
|
39 |
% |
|
|
BBF |
|
39 |
% |
|
|
RNJ |
|
35 |
% |
|
|
BNJ |
|
36 |
% |
|
|
RNY |
|
37 |
% |
|
|
BNY |
|
38 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Trusts may invest in various derivative financial instruments, including financial futures contracts as specified in Note 2 of the Notes to Financial Statements, which may constitute forms of economic leverage. Such derivative financial instruments are used to obtain exposure to a market without owning or taking physical custody of securities or to hedge market and/or interest rate risks. Derivative financial instruments involve risks, including the imperfect correlation between the value of a derivative financial instrument and the underlying asset, possible default of the counterparty to the transaction or illiquidity of the derivative financial instrument. The Trusts ability to use a derivative financial instrument successfully depends on the investment advisors ability to predict pertinent market movements accurately, which cannot be assured. The use of derivative financial instruments may result in losses greater than if they had not been used, may require a Trust to sell or purchase portfolio investments at inopportune times or for distressed values, may limit the amount of appreciation a Trust can realize on an investment, may result in lower dividends paid to shareholders or may cause a Trust to hold an investment that it might otherwise sell. The Trusts investments in these instruments are discussed in detail in the Notes to Financial Statements.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
SEMI-ANNUAL REPORT |
JANUARY 31, 2012 |
13 |
|
|
|
|
BlackRock California Municipal Income Trust (BFZ) |
|
(Percentages shown are based on Net Assets) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Municipal Bonds |
|
|
Par |
|
|
Value |
|
California 95.2% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Corporate 0.2% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
City of Chula Vista California, Refunding RB, San Diego |
|
$ |
680 |
|
$ |
786,957 |
|
County/City/Special District/School District 34.4% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Butte-Glenn Community College District, GO, Election of |
|
|
8,425 |
|
|
9,935,518 |
|
California State Public Works Board, RB, Various Capital |
|
|
8,000 |
|
|
9,386,960 |
|
Cerritos Community College District, GO, Election of 2004, |
|
|
3,000 |
|
|
3,439,500 |
|
City of Los Angeles, RB, Series A, 5.00%, 6/01/39 |
|
|
2,000 |
|
|
2,196,540 |
|
City of San Jose California, RB, Convention Center |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6.13%, 5/01/31 |
|
|
500 |
|
|
562,900 |
|
6.50%, 5/01/36 |
|
|
1,210 |
|
|
1,364,009 |
|
6.50%, 5/01/42 |
|
|
2,225 |
|
|
2,497,585 |
|
County of Kern California, COP, Capital Improvements |
|
|
2,000 |
|
|
2,318,820 |
|
Desert Community College District, GO, CAB, Election of |
|
|
4,230 |
|
|
602,394 |
|
Escondido Union High School District, GO, CAB (AGC), |
|
|
5,280 |
|
|
1,498,939 |
|
Evergreen Elementary School District, GO, Election of |
|
|
2,500 |
|
|
2,785,125 |
|
Grossmont Healthcare District, GO, Election of 2006, |
|
|
2,000 |
|
|
2,377,800 |
|
Long Beach Unified School District California, GO, |
|
|
4,135 |
|
|
4,887,570 |
|
Los Alamitos Unified School District California, GO, |
|
|
5,735 |
|
|
6,575,751 |
|
Los Angeles Municipal Improvement Corp., Refunding |
|
|
4,975 |
|
|
5,641,053 |
|
Modesto Irrigation District, COP, Capital Improvements, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5.75%, 10/01/29 |
|
|
3,000 |
|
|
3,414,240 |
|
5.75%, 10/01/34 |
|
|
180 |
|
|
200,041 |
|
Norwalk-La Mirada Unified School District California, |
|
|
7,500 |
|
|
1,790,025 |
|
Oak Grove School District California, GO, Election of |
|
|
6,000 |
|
|
6,952,740 |
|
Orange County Sanitation District, COP (NPFGC), 5.00%, |
|
|
3,600 |
|
|
3,704,832 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Municipal Bonds |
|
|
Par |
|
|
Value |
|
California (continued) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
County/City/Special
District/School District |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange County Water District, COP, Refunding, 5.25%, |
|
$ |
2,000 |
|
$ |
2,289,980 |
|
Pico Rivera Public Financing Authority, RB, 5.75%, |
|
|
2,000 |
|
|
2,196,740 |
|
Pittsburg Unified School District, GO, Election 2006, |
|
|
2,000 |
|
|
2,263,020 |
|
San Bernardino Community College District, GO, Election |
|
|
5,000 |
|
|
857,350 |
|
San Diego Community College District California, GO, |
|
|
1,500 |
|
|
1,721,910 |
|
San Diego Regional Building Authority California, RB, |
|
|
6,500 |
|
|
7,240,220 |
|
San Jose Financing Authority, Refunding RB, Civic Center |
|
|
6,000 |
|
|
6,025,860 |
|
San Leandro Unified School District California, GO, |
|
|
3,060 |
|
|
3,550,640 |
|
Santa Ana Unified School District, GO, Election of 2008, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5.50%, 8/01/30 |
|
|
6,455 |
|
|
7,259,616 |
|
5.13%, 8/01/33 |
|
|
10,000 |
|
|
10,895,000 |
|
Santa Clara County Financing Authority, Refunding LRB, |
|
|
21,000 |
|
|
22,945,650 |
|
Santa Cruz County Redevelopment Agency California, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6.63%, 9/01/29 |
|
|
1,000 |
|
|
1,165,940 |
|
7.00%, 9/01/36 |
|
|
1,700 |
|
|
1,996,667 |
|
Snowline Joint Unified School District, COP, Refunding, |
|
|
2,250 |
|
|
2,560,455 |
|
Torrance Unified School District California, GO, Election |
|
|
4,000 |
|
|
4,756,240 |
|
Tustin Unified School District, GO, Election of 2008, |
|
|
3,445 |
|
|
4,056,660 |
|
West Contra Costa Unified School District, GO, Election |
|
|
3,000 |
|
|
3,447,360 |
|
Westminster Redevelopment Agency California, Tax |
|
|
7,750 |
|
|
9,294,110 |
|
William S. Hart Union High School District, GO, CAB, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6.28%, 8/01/34 |
|
|
11,150 |
|
|
3,354,701 |
|
6.32%, 8/01/35 |
|
|
9,800 |
|
|
2,776,144 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
172,786,605 |
|
|
|
Portfolio Abbreviations |
|
|
|
ACA |
American Capital Access Corp. |
AGC |
Assured Guaranty Corp. |
AGM |
Assured Guaranty Municipal Corp. |
AMBAC |
American Municipal Bond Assurance Corp. |
AMT |
Alternative Minimum Tax (subject to) |
ARB |
Airport Revenue Bonds |
BHAC |
Berkshire Hathaway Assurance Corp. |
CAB |
Capital Appreciation Bonds |
CIFG |
CDC IXIS Financial Guaranty |
COP |
Certificates of Participation |
EDA |
Economic Development Authority |
EDC |
Economic Development Corp. |
ERB |
Education Revenue Bonds |
FGIC |
Financial Guaranty Insurance Co. |
FHA |
Federal Housing Administration |
GARB |
General Airport Revenue Bonds |
GO |
General Obligation Bonds |
HFA |
Housing Finance Agency |
HRB |
Housing Revenue Bonds |
IDA |
Industrial Development Authority |
IDB |
Industrial Development Board |
ISD |
Independent School District |
LRB |
Lease Revenue Bonds |
MRB |
Mortgage Revenue Bonds |
NPFGC |
National Public Finance Guarantee Corp. |
PILOT |
Payment in Lieu of Taxes |
Q-SBLF |
Qualified School Bond Loan Fund |
RB |
Revenue Bonds |
S/F |
Single-Family |
SONYMA |
State of New York Mortgage Agency |
|
|
|
|
|
|
14 |
SEMI-ANNUAL REPORT |
JANUARY 31, 2012 |
|
|
|
|
Schedule of Investments (continued) |
BlackRock California Municipal Income Trust (BFZ) |
(Percentages shown are based on Net Assets) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Municipal Bonds |
|
|
Par |
|
|
Value |
|
California (continued) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Education 2.8% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
California Educational Facilities Authority, RB, University |
|
$ |
2,900 |
|
$ |
3,252,379 |
|
California Educational Facilities Authority, Refunding RB, |
|
|
6,280 |
|
|
7,446,070 |
|
California Municipal Finance Authority, RB, Emerson |
|
|
2,500 |
|
|
2,756,075 |
|
University of California, RB, Series O, 5.38%, 5/15/34 |
|
|
460 |
|
|
526,493 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
13,981,017 |
|
Health 18.6% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ABAG Finance Authority for Nonprofit Corps, Refunding |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6.38%, 8/01/34 |
|
|
3,055 |
|
|
3,254,461 |
|
6.25%, 8/01/39 |
|
|
3,760 |
|
|
4,343,026 |
|
Series A, 6.00%, 8/01/30 |
|
|
2,275 |
|
|
2,743,559 |
|
California Health Facilities Financing Authority, RB: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Adventist Health System West, Series A, 5.75%, |
|
|
6,475 |
|
|
7,142,896 |
|
Catholic Healthcare West, Series J, 5.63%, 7/01/32 |
|
|
8,300 |
|
|
8,893,450 |
|
Childrens Hospital, Series A, 5.25%, 11/01/41 |
|
|
6,985 |
|
|
7,496,931 |
|
Providence Health, 6.50%, 10/01/18 (b) |
|
|
25 |
|
|
33,718 |
|
Sutter Health, Series A, 5.25%, 11/15/46 |
|
|
7,000 |
|
|
7,295,680 |
|
California Health Facilities Financing Authority, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Catholic Healthcare West, Series A, 6.00%, 7/01/29 |
|
|
1,000 |
|
|
1,178,470 |
|
Catholic Healthcare West, Series A, 6.00%, 7/01/34 |
|
|
4,400 |
|
|
5,075,664 |
|
Catholic Healthcare West, Series A, 6.00%, 7/01/39 |
|
|
2,750 |
|
|
3,128,207 |
|
Providence Health, 6.50%, 10/01/38 |
|
|
4,090 |
|
|
4,811,067 |
|
Sutter Health, Series B, 6.00%, 8/15/42 |
|
|
6,015 |
|
|
6,929,521 |
|
California Statewide Communities Development Authority, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Health Facility Memorial Health Services, 5.50%, |
|
|
7,000 |
|
|
7,301,490 |
|
Kaiser Permanente, 5.50%, 11/01/32 |
|
|
11,090 |
|
|
11,219,198 |
|
California Statewide Communities Development Authority, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Kaiser, Series C, 5.25%, 8/01/31 |
|
|
2,050 |
|
|
2,158,896 |
|
Catholic Healthcare West, Series B, 5.50%, 7/01/30 |
|
|
2,980 |
|
|
3,228,830 |
|
Catholic Healthcare West, Series E, 5.50%, 7/01/31 |
|
|
4,255 |
|
|
4,601,655 |
|
Grossmont Healthcare District, GO, Election of 2006, |
|
|
2,275 |
|
|
2,707,250 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
93,543,969 |
|
State 7.8% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
California State Public Works Board, RB: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Department of Education, Riverside Campus Project, |
|
|
9,000 |
|
|
10,383,300 |
|
Various Capital Projects, Sub-Series I-1, 6.38%, |
|
|
5,025 |
|
|
5,800,508 |
|
State of California, GO, Various Purpose: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6.00%, 3/01/33 |
|
|
5,015 |
|
|
5,956,917 |
|
6.50%, 4/01/33 |
|
|
5,985 |
|
|
7,361,191 |
|
6.00%, 4/01/38 |
|
|
8,390 |
|
|
9,737,686 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
39,239,602 |
|
Transportation 10.4% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
City of San Jose California, RB, California Airport, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5.75%, 3/01/34 |
|
|
2,265 |
|
|
2,502,553 |
|
6.25%, 3/01/34 |
|
|
2,650 |
|
|
3,056,616 |
|
County of Orange California, RB, Series B, 5.75%, |
|
|
8,000 |
|
|
9,002,720 |
|
County of Sacramento California, RB, Airport System: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
PFC/Grant, Sub-Series D, 6.00%, 7/01/35 |
|
|
3,000 |
|
|
3,349,080 |
|
Senior Series B, 5.75%, 7/01/39 |
|
|
1,850 |
|
|
2,041,457 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Municipal Bonds |
|
|
Par |
|
|
Value |
|
California (concluded) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Transportation (concluded) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Los Angeles Department of Airports, RB, Series A: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5.00%, 5/15/34 |
|
$ |
6,000 |
|
$ |
6,639,360 |
|
5.25%, 5/15/39 |
|
|
2,775 |
|
|
3,088,658 |
|
Los Angeles Department of Airports, Refunding RB, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior Series A, 5.00%, 5/15/35 |
|
|
2,945 |
|
|
3,284,971 |
|
Sub-Series C, 5.25%, 5/15/38 |
|
|
1,330 |
|
|
1,447,758 |
|
Los Angeles Harbor Department, RB, Series B, 5.25%, |
|
|
5,530 |
|
|
6,284,568 |
|
San Francisco City & County Airports Commission, RB, |
|
|
6,750 |
|
|
7,821,900 |
|
San Joaquin County Transportation Authority, RB, Limited |
|
|
2,880 |
|
|
3,458,362 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
51,978,003 |
|
Utilities 21.0% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anaheim Public Financing Authority, RB: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anaheim Electric System Distribution, 5.25%, |
|
|
1,500 |
|
|
1,673,100 |
|
Electric System Distribution Facilities, Series A, |
|
|
7,690 |
|
|
8,857,573 |
|
California Infrastructure & Economic Development Bank, |
|
|
5,500 |
|
|
6,047,690 |
|
Calleguas-Las Virgines Public Financing Authority |
|
|
5,280 |
|
|
5,704,459 |
|
City of Chula Vista California, San Diego Gas & Electric, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Series D, 5.88%, 1/01/34 |
|
|
2,500 |
|
|
2,893,225 |
|
Series E, 5.88%, 1/01/34 |
|
|
6,500 |
|
|
7,522,385 |
|
City of Los Angeles California, Refunding RB, |
|
|
4,000 |
|
|
4,544,760 |
|
City of Petaluma California, Refunding RB, 6.00%, |
|
|
5,625 |
|
|
6,727,725 |
|
Dublin-San Ramon Services District, Refunding RB, |
|
|
2,425 |
|
|
2,873,140 |
|
East Bay Municipal Utility District, RB, Series A |
|
|
2,000 |
|
|
2,300,680 |
|
Los Angeles Department of Water & Power, RB: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Power System, Sub-Series A-1, 5.25%, 7/01/38 |
|
|
11,215 |
|
|
12,435,865 |
|
Series A, 5.38%, 7/01/34 |
|
|
3,050 |
|
|
3,493,195 |
|
Series A, 5.25%, 7/01/39 |
|
|
4,000 |
|
|
4,581,520 |
|
Series A, 5.00%, 7/01/41 |
|
|
4,740 |
|
|
5,272,729 |
|
Los Angeles Department of Water & Power, Refunding RB, |
|
|
2,200 |
|
|
2,293,742 |
|
San Diego County Water Authority, COP, Unrefunded, |
|
|
1,850 |
|
|
1,876,381 |
|
San Diego Public Facilities Financing Authority, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior Series A, 5.25%, 5/15/34 |
|
|
9,520 |
|
|
10,819,099 |
|
Series A, 5.25%, 8/01/38 |
|
|
3,255 |
|
|
3,619,593 |
|
San Francisco City & County Public Utilities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Local Water Main, Sub-Series C, 5.00%, 11/01/36 |
|
|
1,000 |
|
|
1,136,230 |
|
Series A (NPFGC), 5.00%, 11/01/32 |
|
|
4,000 |
|
|
4,058,720 |
|
WSIP Sub-Series A, 5.00%, 11/01/37 |
|
|
5,695 |
|
|
6,445,487 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
105,177,298 |
|
Total Municipal Bonds in California |
|
|
|
|
|
477,493,451 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
SEMI-ANNUAL REPORT |
JANUARY 31, 2012 |
15 |
|
|
|
|
Schedule of Investments (continued) |
BlackRock California Municipal Income Trust (BFZ) |
|
(Percentages shown are based on Net Assets) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Municipal Bonds |
|
|
Par |
|
|
Value |
|
Multi-State 1.6% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Housing 1.6% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Centerline Equity Issuer Trust (c)(d): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7.20%, 11/15/14 |
|
$ |
3,500 |
|
$ |
3,822,735 |
|
5.75%, 5/15/15 |
|
|
500 |
|
|
536,840 |
|
6.00%, 5/15/15 |
|
|
1,500 |
|
|
1,625,625 |
|
6.00%, 5/15/19 |
|
|
1,000 |
|
|
1,122,920 |
|
6.30%, 5/15/19 |
|
|
1,000 |
|
|
1,126,270 |
|
Total Municipal Bonds in Multi-State |
|
|
|
|
|
8,234,390 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Puerto Rico 1.3%3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
State 1.3% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Puerto Rico Sales Tax Financing Corp., RB, CAB, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5.73%, 8/01/37 |
|
|
13,260 |
|
|
3,458,739 |
|
6.00%, 8/01/39 |
|
|
12,420 |
|
|
2,892,245 |
|
Total Municipal Bonds in Puerto Rico |
|
|
|
|
|
6,350,984 |
|
Total Municipal Bonds 98.1% |
|
|
|
|
|
492,078,825 |
|
|
|||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
California 64.0% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
County/City/Special District/School District 25.8% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
El Dorado Union High School District, GO, Election of |
|
|
5,020 |
|
|
5,526,869 |
|
Los Angeles Community College District California, GO: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Election of 2001, Series A (AGM), 5.00%, 8/01/32 |
|
|
8,000 |
|
|
8,750,480 |
|
Election of 2003, Series F-1, 5.00%, 8/01/33 |
|
|
5,000 |
|
|
5,515,150 |
|
Election of 2008, Series A, 6.00%, 8/01/33 |
|
|
20,131 |
|
|
24,205,189 |
|
Election of 2008, Series C, 5.25%, 8/01/39 |
|
|
12,900 |
|
|
14,782,110 |
|
Los Angeles Unified School District California, GO, |
|
|
5,000 |
|
|
5,499,750 |
|
Mount San Antonio Community College District California, |
|
|
10,770 |
|
|
11,628,261 |
|
Ohlone Community College District, GO, Ohlone, Series B |
|
|
12,499 |
|
|
13,387,850 |
|
San Bernardino Community College District California, |
|
|
2,000 |
|
|
2,217,220 |
|
San Diego Community College District California, GO: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Election of 2002, 5.25%, 8/01/33 |
|
|
10,484 |
|
|
12,035,515 |
|
Election of 2006 (AGM), 5.00%, 8/01/32 |
|
|
9,000 |
|
|
9,930,420 |
|
San Jose Unified School District Santa Clara County |
|
|
14,625 |
|
|
16,041,985 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
129,520,799 |
|
Education 11.4% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
California Educational Facilities Authority, RB, University |
|
|
10,395 |
|
|
11,658,096 |
|
Grossmont Union High School District California, GO, |
|
|
13,095 |
|
|
14,307,663 |
|
Mount Diablo California Uniform School District, GO, |
|
|
4,000 |
|
|
4,190,240 |
|
San Mateo County Community College District, GO, |
|
|
8,630 |
|
|
9,643,594 |
|
University of California, RB: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Limited Project, Series D (AGM), 5.00%, 5/15/41 |
|
|
2,600 |
|
|
2,774,200 |
|
Series O, 5.75%, 5/15/34 |
|
|
12,300 |
|
|
14,472,795 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
57,046,588 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Municipal Bonds Transferred to |
|
|
Par |
|
|
Value |
|
California (concluded) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Utilities 26.8% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
California State Department of Water Resources, |
|
$ |
7,000 |
|
$ |
8,150,030 |
|
City of Napa California, RB (AMBAC), 5.00%, 5/01/35 |
|
|
3,000 |
|
|
3,222,900 |
|
East Bay Municipal Utility District, RB, Sub-Series A |
|
|
3,000 |
|
|
3,320,460 |
|
Eastern Municipal Water District, COP, Series H, 5.00%, |
|
|
18,002 |
|
|
19,585,425 |
|
Los Angeles Department of Water & Power, RB: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Power System, Sub-Series A-1 (AMBAC), 5.00%, |
|
|
15,998 |
|
|
17,237,384 |
|
Water System, Sub-Series A-2 (AGM), 5.00%, |
|
|
2,000 |
|
|
2,135,220 |
|
Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, RB, |
|
|
11,180 |
|
|
12,301,689 |
|
Orange County Sanitation District, COP, Series B (AGM), |
|
|
14,700 |
|
|
15,843,219 |
|
Orange County Water District, COP, Refunding, 5.00%, |
|
|
10,480 |
|
|
11,586,688 |
|
San Diego County Water Authority, COP, Refunding, |
|
|
14,290 |
|
|
15,458,207 |
|
San Diego Public Facilities Financing Authority, |
|
|
12,457 |
|
|
13,976,831 |
|
San Francisco City & County Public Utilities Commission, |
|
|
10,625 |
|
|
11,866,210 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
134,684,263 |
|
Total Municipal Bonds Transferred to |
|
|
|
|
|
321,251,650 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
Long-Term Investments |
|
|
|
|
|
813,330,475 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||
|
|
Shares |
|
|
|
|
|
BIF California Municipal Money Fund, 0.00% (f)(g) |
|
|
5,547,758 |
|
|
5,547,758 |
|
Total
Short-Term Securities |
|
|
|
|
|
5,547,758 |
|
Total Investments (Cost $744,570,047) 163.2% |
|
|
|
|
|
818,878,233 |
|
Other Assets Less Liabilities 1.5% |
|
|
|
|
|
7,623,578 |
|
Liability for TOB Trust Certificates, Including |
|
|
|
|
|
(153,464,491 |
) |
AMPS, at Redemption Value (34.1)% |
|
|
|
|
|
(171,327,859 |
) |
Net Assets Applicable to Common Shares 100.0% |
|
|
|
|
$ |
501,709,461 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(a) |
Represents a zero-coupon bond. Rate shown reflects the current yield as of report date. |
|
|
(b) |
US government securities, held in escrow, are used to pay interest on this security, as well as to retire the bond in full at the date indicated, typically at a premium to par. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
16 |
SEMI-ANNUAL REPORT |
JANUARY 31, 2012 |
|
|
|
|
Schedule of Investments (concluded) |
BlackRock California Municipal Income Trust (BFZ) |
|
|
(c) |
Security exempt from registration pursuant to Rule 144A under the Securities Act of 1933. These securities may be resold in transactions exempt from registration to qualified institutional investors. |
|
|
(d) |
Security represents a beneficial interest in a trust. The collateral deposited into the trust is federally tax-exempt revenue bonds issued by various state or local governments, or their respective agencies or authorities. The security is subject to remarketing prior to its stated maturity. |
|
|
(e) |
Securities represent bonds transferred to a TOB in exchange for which the Trust acquired residual interest certificates. These securities serve as collateral in a financing transaction. See Note 1 of the Notes to Financial Statements for details of municipal bonds transferred to TOBs. |
|
|
(f) |
Investments in companies considered to be an affiliate of the Trust during the period, for purposes of Section 2(a)(3) of the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended, were as follows: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Affiliate |
|
Shares
Held |
|
Net |
|
Shares
Held |
|
Income |
|
||||
BIF California Municipal |
|
|
2,720,243 |
|
|
2,827,515 |
|
|
5,547,758 |
|
$ |
163 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(g) |
Represents the current yield as of report date. |
|
|
|
For Trust compliance purposes, the Trusts sector classifications refer to any 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 Trust management. These definitions may not apply for purposes of this report, which may combine such sector sub-classifications for reporting ease. |
|
|
|
Financial futures contracts sold as of January 31, 2012 were as follows: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Contracts |
|
Issue |
|
Exchange |
|
Expiration |
|
Notional |
|
Unrealized |
|
||
60 |
|
10-Year
US |
|
Chicago
|
|
March
|
|
$ |
7,935,000 |
|
$ |
(105,114 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Fair Value Measurements Various inputs are used in determining the fair value of investments and derivative financial instruments. These inputs are categorized into a disclosure hierarchy consisting of three broad levels for financial statement purposes as follows: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Level 1 unadjusted price quotations in active markets/exchanges for identical assets and liabilities |
|
|
|
|
|
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) |
|
|
|
|
|
Level 3 unobservable inputs based on the best information available in the circumstances, to the extent observable inputs are not available (including the Trusts own assumptions used in determining the fair value of investments and derivative financial instruments) |
|
|
|
|
Changes in valuation
techniques may result in transfers in or out of an assigned level within the
disclosure hierarchy. The categorization of a value determined for investments
and derivative financial instruments is based on the pricing transparency of
the investment and derivative financial instrument and does not necessarily
correspond to the Trusts perceived risk of investing in those securities. For
information about the Trusts policy regarding valuation of investments and
derivative financial instruments and other significant accounting policies,
please refer to Note 1 of the Notes to Financial Statements. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Valuation Inputs |
|
Level 1 |
|
Level 2 |
|
Level 3 |
|
Total |
|
||||
Assets: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Investments: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Long-Term |
|
|
|
|
$ |
813,330,475 |
|
|
|
|
$ |
813,330,475 |
|
Short-Term |
|
$ |
5,547,758 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,547,758 |
|
Total |
|
$ |
5,547,758 |
|
$ |
813,330,475 |
|
|
|
|
$ |
818,878,233 |
|
|
|
1 |
See above Schedule of Investments for values in each sector. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Valuation Inputs |
|
Level 1 |
|
Level 2 |
|
Level 3 |
|
Total |
|
||||
Derivative Financial |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Liabilities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest rate |
|
$ |
(105,114 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
(105,114 |
) |
|
|
2 |
Derivative financial instruments are financial futures contracts, which are valued at the unrealized appreciation/depreciation on the instrument. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
SEMI-ANNUAL REPORT |
JANUARY 31, 2012 |
17 |
|
|
|
|
Schedule of Investments January 31, 2012 (Unaudited) |
BlackRock Florida Municipal 2020 Term Trust (BFO) |
(Percentages shown are based on Net Assets) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Municipal Bonds |
|
Par |
|
Value |
|
||
Florida 143.5% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Corporate 11.1% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
County of Escambia Florida, Refunding RB, Environment, |
|
$ |
4,000 |
|
$ |
4,088,000 |
|
Hillsborough County IDA, Refunding RB, Tampa |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5.50%, 10/01/23 |
|
|
1,955 |
|
|
2,008,059 |
|
Series A, 5.65%, 5/15/18 |
|
|
1,000 |
|
|
1,162,310 |
|
Palm Beach County Solid Waste Authority, Refunding RB, |
|
|
2,000 |
|
|
2,460,360 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9,718,729 |
|
County/City/Special District/School District 64.4% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Broward County School Board Florida, COP, Refunding, |
|
|
2,000 |
|
|
2,317,280 |
|
Broward County School Board Florida, COP, Series A |
|
|
2,500 |
|
|
2,825,275 |
|
County of Hillsborough Florida, RB (AMBAC), 5.00%, |
|
|
5,545 |
|
|
6,285,480 |
|
County of Miami-Dade Florida, RB, Sub-Series B |
|
|
7,560 |
|
|
2,296,123 |
|
County of Miami-Dade Florida, Refunding RB, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5.33%, 10/01/19 |
|
|
5,365 |
|
|
3,617,351 |
|
5.31%, 10/01/20 |
|
|
10,000 |
|
|
6,377,200 |
|
County of Orange Florida, Refunding RB, Series A |
|
|
2,200 |
|
|
2,279,288 |
|
Florida State Board of Education, GO, Refunding, |
|
|
485 |
|
|
603,854 |
|
Hillsborough County School Board, COP (NPFGC), |
|
|
1,000 |
|
|
1,027,090 |
|
Miami-Dade County Educational Facilities Authority |
|
|
1,000 |
|
|
1,096,160 |
|
Miami-Dade County School Board, COP, Refunding, |
|
|
4,000 |
|
|
4,631,920 |
|
Northern Palm Beach County Improvement District, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.50%, 8/01/22 |
|
|
1,000 |
|
|
915,050 |
|
5.00%, 8/01/31 |
|
|
1,000 |
|
|
893,350 |
|
Palm Beach County School District, COP, Refunding, |
|
|
6,500 |
|
|
6,612,450 |
|
Sterling Hill Community Development District, Special |
|
|
3,705 |
|
|
3,428,829 |
|
Stevens Plantation Improvement Project Dependent |
|
|
2,425 |
|
|
1,888,954 |
|
Tolomato Community Development District, Special |
|
|
1,150 |
|
|
490,452 |
|
Village Center Community Development District, RB: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(NPFGC), 5.25%, 10/01/23 |
|
|
5,000 |
|
|
5,102,100 |
|
Sub-Series B, 6.35%, 1/01/18 |
|
|
2,000 |
|
|
2,031,860 |
|
Village Community Development District No. 5 Florida, |
|
|
1,075 |
|
|
1,101,821 |
|
Watergrass Community Development District, Special |
|
|
980 |
|
|
683,148 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
56,505,035 |
|
Education 1.6% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Florida State Board of Governors, Refunding RB, |
|
|
500 |
|
|
593,210 |
|
Orange County Educational Facilities Authority, RB, |
|
|
725 |
|
|
826,906 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,420,116 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Municipal Bonds |
|
Par |
|
Value |
|
||
Florida (concluded) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Health 12.0% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Highlands County Health Facilities Authority, Refunding |
|
$ |
2,155 |
|
$ |
2,575,139 |
|
Hillsborough County IDA, RB, H. Lee Moffitt Cancer |
|
|
1,500 |
|
|
1,654,905 |
|
Marion County Hospital District Florida, Refunding RB, |
|
|
1,500 |
|
|
1,605,915 |
|
Orange County Health Facilities Authority, RB, Hospital, |
|
|
3,000 |
|
|
3,150,510 |
|
Palm Beach County Health Facilities Authority, Refunding |
|
|
1,285 |
|
|
1,531,746 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10,518,215 |
|
Housing 2.5% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Florida Housing Finance Corp., RB, Homeowner Mortgage, |
|
|
980 |
|
|
1,013,055 |
|
Jacksonville Housing Finance Authority, Refunding RB, |
|
|
505 |
|
|
547,531 |
|
Manatee County Housing Finance Authority, RB, Series A, |
|
|
575 |
|
|
645,570 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,206,156 |
|
State 19.0% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Florida Municipal Loan Council, RB: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CAB, Series A (NPFGC), 5.23%, 4/01/20 (a) |
|
|
4,000 |
|
|
2,893,000 |
|
Series D (AGM), 5.00%, 10/01/19 |
|
|
1,050 |
|
|
1,257,984 |
|
Series D (AGM), 4.00%, 10/01/20 |
|
|
1,105 |
|
|
1,244,142 |
|
Series D (AGM), 4.00%, 10/01/21 |
|
|
500 |
|
|
562,530 |
|
Florida State Board of Education, GO, Public Education, |
|
|
6,150 |
|
|
6,519,492 |
|
Florida State Board of Education, GO, Refunding, Public |
|
|
500 |
|
|
532,715 |
|
Florida State Department of Environmental Protection, |
|
|
3,000 |
|
|
3,640,860 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
16,650,723 |
|
Transportation 11.2% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Broward County Florida Port Facilities Revenue, |
|
|
2,500 |
|
|
2,794,950 |
|
County of Lee Florida, Refunding RB, Series B (AMBAC): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5.00%, 10/01/20 |
|
|
2,250 |
|
|
2,419,335 |
|
5.00%, 10/01/22 |
|
|
3,000 |
|
|
3,200,850 |
|
Greater Orlando Aviation Authority, Refunding RB, |
|
|
1,130 |
|
|
1,378,080 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9,793,215 |
|
Utilities 21.7% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
City of Deltona Florida, RB (NPFGC), 5.00%, 10/01/23 |
|
|
1,095 |
|
|
1,138,647 |
|
City of Lakeland Florida, Refunding RB, 5.00%, |
|
|
1,000 |
|
|
1,031,960 |
|
City of Marco Island Florida, RB (NPFGC): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5.25%, 10/01/13 (b) |
|
|
1,000 |
|
|
1,081,180 |
|
5.00%, 10/01/22 |
|
|
2,000 |
|
|
2,134,280 |
|
5.00%, 10/01/23 |
|
|
1,375 |
|
|
1,456,001 |
|
County of Miami-Dade Florida, Refunding RB, System, |
|
|
4,000 |
|
|
4,961,360 |
|
Tohopekaliga Water Authority, RB, Series B (AGM): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5.00%, 10/01/22 |
|
|
1,975 |
|
|
2,111,018 |
|
5.00%, 10/01/23 |
|
|
1,180 |
|
|
1,260,240 |
|
Tohopekaliga Water Authority, Refunding RB, Series A |
|
|
3,630 |
|
|
3,876,840 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
19,051,526 |
|
Total Municipal Bonds in Florida |
|
|
|
|
|
125,863,715 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
18 |
SEMI-ANNUAL REPORT |
JANUARY 31, 2012 |
|
|
|
|
Schedule of Investments (concluded) |
BlackRock Florida Municipal 2020 Term Trust (BFO) |
(Percentages shown are based on Net Assets) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Municipal Bonds |
|
Par |
|
Value |
|
||
Puerto Rico 1.9% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
State 1.9% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, GO, Public Improvement |
|
$ |
1,000 |
|
$ |
1,181,870 |
|
Puerto Rico Sales Tax Financing Corp., RB, Sales Tax |
|
|
415 |
|
|
500,262 |
|
Total Municipal Bonds in Puerto Rico |
|
|
|
|
|
1,682,132 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
US Virgin Islands 1.1% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Corporate 1.1% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Virgin Islands Public Finance Authority, Refunding RB, |
|
|
1,000 |
|
|
1,000,220 |
|
Total Municipal Bonds 146.5% |
|
|
|
|
|
128,546,067 |
|
|
|||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Florida 0.9% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Housing 0.9% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lee County Housing Finance Authority, RB, Multi-County |
|
|
720 |
|
|
769,586 |
|
Total
Municipal Bonds Transferred to |
|
|
|
|
|
769,586 |
|
Total
Long-Term Investments |
|
|
|
|
|
129,315,653 |
|
|
|||||||
|
|||||||
|
|
Shares |
|
|
|
|
|
BIF Florida Municipal Money Fund, 0.00% (d)(e) |
|
|
774,142 |
|
|
774,142 |
|
Total Short-Term
Securities |
|
|
|
|
|
774,142 |
|
Total Investments (Cost $125,598,094) 148.3% |
|
|
|
|
|
130,089,795 |
|
Other Assets Less Liabilities 1.1% |
|
|
|
|
|
1,000,415 |
|
Liability for TOB Trust Certificates, Including |
|
|
|
|
|
(480,453 |
) |
AMPS, at Redemption Value (48.9)% |
|
|
|
|
|
(42,900,310 |
) |
Net Assets Applicable to Common Shares 100.0% |
|
|
|
|
$ |
87,709,447 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(a) |
Represents a zero-coupon bond. Rate shown reflects the current yield as of report date. |
|
|
(b) |
US government securities, held in escrow, are used to pay interest on this security, as well as to retire the bond in full at the date indicated, typically at a premium to par. |
|
|
(c) |
Securities represent bonds transferred to a TOB in exchange for which the Trust acquired residual interest certificates. These securities serve as collateral in a financing transaction. See Note 1 of the Notes to Financial Statements for details of municipal bonds transferred to TOBs. |
|
|
(d) |
Investments in companies considered to be an affiliate of the Trust during the period, for purposes of Section 2(a)(3) of the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended, were as follows: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Affiliate |
|
Shares
Held |
|
Net |
|
Shares
Held |
|
Income |
|
||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
BIF Florida Municipal |
|
|
1,843,816 |
|
|
(1,069,674 |
) |
|
774,142 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(e) |
Represents the current yield as of report date. |
|
|
|
|
For Trust compliance purposes, the Trusts sector classifications refer to any 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 Trust management. These definitions may not apply for purposes of this report, which may combine such sector sub-classifications for reporting ease. |
|
|
|
|
|
Fair Value Measurements Various inputs are used in determining the fair value of investments. These inputs are categorized into a disclosure hierarchy consisting of three broad levels for financial statement purposes as follows: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Level 1 unadjusted price quotations in active markets/exchanges for identical assets and liabilities |
|
|
|
|
|
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) |
|
|
|
|
|
Level 3 unobservable inputs based on the best information available in the circumstances, to the extent observable inputs are not available (including the Trusts own assumptions used in determining the fair value of investments) |
Changes in valuation techniques may result in transfers in or out of an assigned level within the disclosure hierarchy. The categorization of a value determined for investments is based on the pricing transparency of the investment and does not necessarily correspond to the Trusts perceived risk of investing in those securities. For information about the Trusts policy regarding valuation of investments and other significant accounting policies, please refer to Note 1 of the Notes to Financial Statements.
The following table summarizes the inputs used as of January 31, 2012 in determining the fair valuation of the Trusts investments:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Valuation Inputs |
|
Level 1 |
|
Level 2 |
|
Level 3 |
|
Total |
|
||||
Assets: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Investments: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Long-Term |
|
|
|
|
$ |
129,315,653 |
|
|
|
|
$ |
129,315,653 |
|
Short-Term |
|
$ |
774,142 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
774,142 |
|
Total |
|
$ |
774,142 |
|
$ |
129,315,653 |
|
|
|
|
$ |
130,089,795 |
|
|
|
1 |
See above Schedule of Investments for values in each sector. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
SEMI-ANNUAL REPORT |
JANUARY 31, 2012 |
19 |
|
|
|
|
Schedule of Investments January 31, 2012 (Unaudited) |
BlackRock Investment Quality Municipal Income Trust (RFA) |
(Percentages shown are based on Net Assets) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Municipal Bonds |
|
Par |
|
Value |
|
||
Alabama 0.3% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Selma Industrial Development Board, RB, International |
|
$ |
40 |
|
$ |
41,815 |
|
Alaska 0.3% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Northern Tobacco Securitization Corp., RB, Series A, |
|
|
50 |
|
|
36,804 |
|
California 8.3% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
California Health Facilities Financing Authority, RB: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Series A, 5.00%, 11/15/40 (a) |
|
|
25 |
|
|
26,860 |
|
Sutter Health, Series B, 6.00%, 8/15/42 |
|
|
120 |
|
|
138,245 |
|
California Health Facilities Financing Authority, |
|
|
130 |
|
|
147,879 |
|
California State Educational Facilities Authority, RB, |
|
|
200 |
|
|
224,942 |
|
Los Angeles Department of Water & Power, RB, Power |
|
|
200 |
|
|
221,772 |
|
San Diego Regional Building Authority California, RB, |
|
|
240 |
|
|
267,331 |
|
State of California, GO, Various Purpose, 6.00%, |
|
|
185 |
|
|
219,747 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,246,776 |
|
Colorado 1.1% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Colorado Health Facilities Authority, Refunding RB, |
|
|
155 |
|
|
171,570 |
|
Delaware 1.2% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
County of Sussex Delaware, RB, NRG Energy, Inc., |
|
|
175 |
|
|
181,429 |
|
Florida 6.8% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
County of Lee Florida, Refunding ARB, Series A, AMT, |
|
|
150 |
|
|
162,018 |
|
Manatee County Housing Finance Authority, RB, |
|
|
145 |
|
|
162,796 |
|
Orange County Health Facilities Authority, RB, 5.00%, |
|
|
115 |
|
|
126,328 |
|
Village Center Community Development District, RB, |
|
|
450 |
|
|
438,620 |
|
Village Community Development District No. 9, RB, |
|
|
130 |
|
|
131,427 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,021,189 |
|
Illinois 11.1% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
City of Chicago Illinois, Board of Education, GO, |
|
|
200 |
|
|
226,616 |
|
City of Chicago Illinois, RB, Series A, 5.25%, 1/01/38 |
|
|
55 |
|
|
62,021 |
|
City of Chicago Illinois, Refunding RB, General, Third |
|
|
445 |
|
|
537,756 |
|
City of Chicago Illinois Transit Authority, RB, Sales Tax |
|
|
45 |
|
|
50,310 |
|
Illinois Finance Authority, RB, Navistar International, |
|
|
75 |
|
|
79,583 |
|
Illinois Finance Authority, Refunding RB, Series A: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Carle Foundation, 6.00%, 8/15/41 |
|
|
250 |
|
|
272,540 |
|
Northwestern Memorial Hospital, 6.00%, 8/15/39 |
|
|
250 |
|
|
287,522 |
|
Railsplitter Tobacco Settlement Authority, RB: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5.50%, 6/01/23 |
|
|
100 |
|
|
114,092 |
|
6.00%, 6/01/28 |
|
|
30 |
|
|
33,640 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,664,080 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Municipal Bonds |
|
Par |
|
Value |
|
||
Indiana 5.4% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Indiana Finance Authority WasteWater Utility, RB, First |
|
$ |
200 |
|
$ |
230,792 |
|
Indiana Municipal Power Agency, RB, Series B, 6.00%, |
|
|
335 |
|
|
382,067 |
|
Indianapolis Local Public Improvement Bond Bank, RB, |
|
|
170 |
|
|
195,789 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
808,648 |
|
Iowa 0.2% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Iowa Tobacco Settlement Authority, RB, Series C, 5.63%, |
|
|
40 |
|
|
30,022 |
|
Kansas 1.9% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Kansas Development Finance Authority, Refunding RB, |
|
|
250 |
|
|
289,350 |
|
Kentucky 4.0% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Kentucky Economic Development Finance Authority, RB, |
|
|
100 |
|
|
110,416 |
|
Louisville & Jefferson County Metropolitan Government, |
|
|
215 |
|
|
230,740 |
|
Louisville & Jefferson County Metropolitan Government |
|
|
220 |
|
|
256,597 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
597,753 |
|
Louisiana 0.7% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Louisiana Local Government Environmental Facilities |
|
|
100 |
|
|
109,212 |
|
Maine 1.5% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Maine Health & Higher Educational Facilities Authority, |
|
|
190 |
|
|
217,628 |
|
Massachusetts 7.0% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Massachusetts Development Finance Agency, |
|
|
125 |
|
|
143,846 |
|
Massachusetts HFA, HRB, Series B, AMT, 5.50%, |
|
|
220 |
|
|
229,691 |
|
Massachusetts HFA, Refunding HRB, Series F, AMT, |
|
|
250 |
|
|
262,365 |
|
Massachusetts HFA, Refunding RB, Series C, AMT, |
|
|
120 |
|
|
126,138 |
|
Massachusetts State College Building Authority, RB, |
|
|
250 |
|
|
281,418 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,043,458 |
|
Michigan 5.6% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lansing Board of Water & Light Utilities System, RB, |
|
|
130 |
|
|
150,927 |
|
Michigan State Building Authority, Refunding RB, |
|
|
250 |
|
|
285,928 |
|
Royal Oak Hospital Finance Authority Michigan, |
|
|
325 |
|
|
401,901 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
838,756 |
|
Nevada 5.2% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
City of Las Vegas Nevada, GO, Limited Tax, Performing |
|
|
250 |
|
|
291,712 |
|
County of Clark Nevada, RB, Series B, 5.75%, 7/01/42 |
|
|
440 |
|
|
493,698 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
785,410 |
|
|
|
|
|
See Notes to Financial Statements. |
|||
|
|
|
|
20 |
|
SEMI-ANNUAL REPORT |
JANUARY 31, 2012 |
|
|
|
|
Schedule of Investments (continued) |
BlackRock Investment Quality Municipal Income Trust (RFA) |
(Percentages shown are based on Net Assets) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Municipal Bonds |
|
Par |
|
Value |
|
||
New Jersey 6.6% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
New Jersey EDA, Refunding RB: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
New Jersey American Water Co., Inc., Series A, AMT, |
|
$ |
175 |
|
$ |
192,549 |
|
School Facilities Construction, Series AA, 5.50%, |
|
|
250 |
|
|
284,845 |
|
New Jersey State Housing & Mortgage Finance Agency, |
|
|
165 |
|
|
176,989 |
|
New Jersey Transportation Trust Fund Authority, RB, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5.25%, 6/15/36 |
|
|
100 |
|
|
112,515 |
|
Series A, 5.88%, 12/15/38 |
|
|
190 |
|
|
218,093 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
984,991 |
|
New York 7.0% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hudson New York Yards Infrastructure Corp., RB, |
|
|
40 |
|
|
45,200 |
|
New York City Transitional Finance Authority, RB: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Building Aid, Sub-Series 1A, 5.25%, 7/15/37 |
|
|
150 |
|
|
169,941 |
|
Fiscal 2009, Series S-3, 5.25%, 1/15/39 |
|
|
250 |
|
|
276,472 |
|
Sub-Series S-2A, 5.00%, 7/15/30 |
|
|
185 |
|
|
213,697 |
|
New York Liberty Development Corp., Refunding RB, |
|
|
85 |
|
|
92,013 |
|
Triborough Bridge & Tunnel Authority, RB, General, |
|
|
225 |
|
|
256,849 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,054,172 |
|
Pennsylvania 8.1% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pennsylvania Economic Development Financing |
|
|
300 |
|
|
348,456 |
|
Pennsylvania HFA, Refunding RB, Series 99A, AMT, |
|
|
200 |
|
|
217,266 |
|
Pennsylvania Turnpike Commission, RB: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sub-Series A, 6.00%, 12/01/41 |
|
|
350 |
|
|
390,457 |
|
Sub-Series C (AGC), 6.25%, 6/01/38 |
|
|
215 |
|
|
255,867 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,212,046 |
|
Texas 10.6% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Central Texas Regional Mobility Authority, RB, Senior |
|
|
240 |
|
|
257,086 |
|
Conroe ISD Texas, GO, School Building, Series A, 5.75%, |
|
|
140 |
|
|
170,423 |
|
Harris County Cultural Education Facilities Finance |
|
|
100 |
|
|
114,347 |
|
Harris County Health Facilities Development Corp., |
|
|
250 |
|
|
300,597 |
|
North Texas Tollway Authority, RB, Special Projects |
|
|
250 |
|
|
289,080 |
|
Tarrant County Cultural Education Facilities Finance |
|
|
280 |
|
|
318,212 |
|
Texas Private Activity Bond Surface Transportation Corp., |
|
|
125 |
|
|
139,039 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,588,784 |
|
Virginia 2.0% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Virginia Public School Authority, RB, School Financing, |
|
|
250 |
|
|
295,717 |
|
Total Municipal Bonds 94.9% |
|
|
|
|
|
14,219,610 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Municipal Bonds Transferred to |
|
Par |
|
Value |
|
||
California 19.8% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
California Educational Facilities Authority, RB, |
|
$ |
300 |
|
$ |
336,453 |
|
Grossmont Union High School District, GO, Election of |
|
|
300 |
|
|
327,993 |
|
Los Angeles Community College District California, GO: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Election of 2008, Series C, 5.25%, 8/01/39 |
|
|
390 |
|
|
446,901 |
|
Series A, 6.00%, 8/01/33 |
|
|
700 |
|
|
841,293 |
|
Los Angeles Unified School District California, GO, |
|
|
60 |
|
|
65,997 |
|
San Diego Public Facilities Financing Authority, |
|
|
615 |
|
|
707,543 |
|
University of California, RB, Series O, 5.75%, 5/15/34 |
|
|
210 |
|
|
247,096 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,973,276 |
|
District of Columbia 3.8% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
District of Columbia, RB, Series A, 5.50%, 12/01/30 |
|
|
195 |
|
|
235,759 |
|
District of Columbia Water & Sewer Authority, RB, |
|
|
300 |
|
|
339,746 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
575,505 |
|
Florida 3.6% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hillsborough County Aviation Authority, RB, Series A, |
|
|
280 |
|
|
296,038 |
|
Lee County Housing Finance Authority, RB, Multi-County |
|
|
225 |
|
|
240,496 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
536,534 |
|
Illinois 5.0% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Illinois Finance Authority, RB, University of Chicago, |
|
|
400 |
|
|
476,128 |
|
Illinois State Toll Highway Authority, RB, Series B, |
|
|
250 |
|
|
275,199 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
751,327 |
|
Massachusetts 1.7% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Massachusetts School Building Authority, RB, Senior, |
|
|
220 |
|
|
249,465 |
|
Nevada 3.9% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clark County Water Reclamation District, GO, Limited |
|
|
500 |
|
|
585,040 |
|
New Hampshire 1.2% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
New Hampshire Health & Education Facilities Authority, |
|
|
165 |
|
|
188,719 |
|
New Jersey 2.2% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
New Jersey Transportation Trust Fund Authority, RB, |
|
|
300 |
|
|
325,677 |
|
New York 9.9% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
New York City Municipal Water Finance Authority, RB: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fiscal 2009, Series A, 5.75%, 6/15/40 |
|
|
240 |
|
|
280,377 |
|
Series FF-2, 5.50%, 6/15/40 |
|
|
255 |
|
|
293,526 |
|
New York Liberty Development Corp., RB, 1 World Trade |
|
|
315 |
|
|
357,850 |
|
New York Liberty Development Corp., Refunding RB, |
|
|
190 |
|
|
216,207 |
|
New York State Dormitory Authority, ERB, Series B, |
|
|
300 |
|
|
335,841 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,483,801 |
|
Ohio 1.6% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
County of Allen Ohio, Refunding RB, Catholic Healthcare, |
|
|
230 |
|
|
244,821 |
|
|
|
|
|
See Notes to Financial Statements. |
|||
|
|
|
|
|
SEMI-ANNUAL REPORT |
JANUARY 31, 2012 |
21 |
|
|
|
|
Schedule of Investments (concluded) |
BlackRock Investment Quality Municipal Income Trust (RFA) |
(Percentages shown are based on Net Assets) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Municipal Bonds Transferred to |
|
Par |
|
Value |
|
||
Puerto Rico 1.0% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Puerto Rico Sales Tax Financing Corp., RB, Series C, |
|
$ |
130 |
|
$ |
144,366 |
|
South Carolina 3.9% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
South Carolina State Public Service Authority, RB, |
|
|
510 |
|
|
579,880 |
|
Texas 5.3% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
City of San Antonio Texas, Refunding RB, Series A, |
|
|
300 |
|
|
347,185 |
|
Harris County Cultural Education Facilities Finance |
|
|
400 |
|
|
447,092 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
794,277 |
|
Virginia 1.0% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fairfax County IDA Virginia, Refunding RB, Health Care, |
|
|
130 |
|
|
145,347 |
|
Wisconsin 1.7% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Wisconsin Health & Educational Facilities Authority, |
|
|
240 |
|
|
255,386 |
|
Total
Municipal Bonds Transferred to |
|
|
|
|
|
9,833,421 |
|
Total
Long-Term Investments |
|
|
|
|
|
24,053,031 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Short-Term Securities |
|
Shares |
|
|
|
|
|
FFI Institutional Tax-Exempt Fund, 0.01% (c)(d) |
|
|
390,265 |
|
|
390,265 |
|
Total
Short-Term Securities |
|
|
|
|
|
390,265 |
|
Total Investments (Cost $21,955,835) 163.1% |
|
|
|
|
|
24,443,296 |
|
Other Assets Less Liabilities 0.3% |
|
|
|
|
|
47,801 |
|
Liability for TOB Trust Certificates, Including |
|
|
|
|
|
(4,930,802 |
) |
AMPS, at Redemption Value (30.5)% |
|
|
|
|
|
(4,575,076 |
) |
Net Assets Applicable to Common Stocks 100.0% |
|
|
|
|
$ |
14,985,219 |
|
|
|
|
|
(a) |
When-issued security. Unsettled when-issued transactions were as follows: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
Counterparty |
|
Value |
|
Unrealized |
|
|
|||||||
JPMorgan Chase Bank NA |
|
$ |
26,860 |
|
|
$ |
270 |
|
|
||||
Citigroup Global Markets, Inc. |
|
$ |
131,427 |
|
|
$ |
1,427 |
|
|
||||
|
|
(b) |
Securities represent bonds transferred to a TOB in exchange for which the Trust acquired residual interest certificates. These securities serve as collateral in a financing transaction. See Note 1 of the Notes to Financial Statements for details of municipal bonds transferred to TOBs. |
|
|
(c) |
Investments in companies considered to be an affiliate of the Trust during the period, for purposes of Section 2(a)(3) of the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended, were as follows: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Affiliate |
|
Shares
Held |
|
Net |
|
Shares
Held |
|
Income |
|
||||||||||||
FFI Institutional |
|
|
|
302,911 |
|
|
|
|
87,354 |
|
|
|
|
390,265 |
|
|
|
$ |
17 |
|
|
|
|
(d) |
Represents the current yield as of report date. |
|
|
|
Financial futures contracts sold as of January 31, 2012 were as follows: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Contracts |
|
Issue |
|
Exchange |
|
Expiration |
|
|
Notional |
|
|
Unrealized |
5 |
|
10-Year
US |
|
Chicago |
|
March 2012 |
|
$ |
661,250 |
|
$ |
(8,760) |
|
|
|
|
|
Fair Value Measurements Various inputs are used in determining the fair value of investments and derivative financial instruments. These inputs are categorized into a disclosure hierarchy consisting of three broad levels for financial statement purposes as follows: |
||
|
|
|
|
|
|
Level 1 unadjusted price quotations in active markets/exchanges for identical assets and liabilities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Level 3 unobservable inputs based on the best information available in the circumstances, to the extent observable inputs are not available (including the Trusts own assumptions used in determining the fair value of investments and derivative financial instruments) |
Changes in valuation techniques may result in transfers in or out of an assigned level within the disclosure hierarchy. The categorization of a value determined for investments and derivative financial instruments is based on the pricing transparency of the investment and derivative financial instrument and does not necessarily correspond to the Trusts perceived risk of investing in those securities. For information about the Trusts policy regarding valuation of investments and derivative financial instruments and other significant accounting policies, please refer to Note 1 of the Notes to Financial Statements.
The following tables summarize the inputs used as of January 31, 2012 in determining the fair valuation of the Trusts investments and derivative financial instruments:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Valuation Inputs |
|
Level 1 |
|
Level 2 |
|
Level 3 |
|
Total |
|
||||
Assets: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Investments: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Long-Term |
|
|
|
|
$ |
24,053,031 |
|
|
|
|
$ |
24,053,031 |
|
Short-Term |
|
$ |
390,265 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
390,265 |
|
Total |
|
$ |
390,265 |
|
$ |
24,053,031 |
|
|
|
|
$ |
24,443,296 |
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
See above Schedule of Investments for values in each sector. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Valuation Inputs |
|
Level 1 |
|
Level 2 |
|
Level 3 |
|
Total |
|
||||
Derivative Financial |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Liabilities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest rate |
|
$ |
(8,760 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
(8,760 |
) |
|
|
|
|
2 |
Derivative financial instruments are financial futures contracts, which are valued at the unrealized appreciation/depreciation on the instrument. |
|
|
|
|
See Notes to Financial Statements. |
|||
|
|
|
|
22 |
|
SEMI-ANNUAL REPORT |
JANUARY 31, 2012 |
|
|
|
|
Schedule of Investments January 31, 2012 (Unaudited) |
BlackRock Municipal Income Investment Trust (BBF) |
(Percentages shown are based on Net Assets) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Municipal Bonds |
|
Par |
|
Value |
|
||
Alabama 0.3% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Selma Industrial Development Board, RB, International |
|
$ |
275 |
|
$ |
287,480 |
|
Alaska 0.2% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Northern Tobacco Securitization Corp., RB, Asset Backed, |
|
|
330 |
|
|
242,903 |
|
California 9.8% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
California Educational Facilities Authority, RB, University |
|
|
1,315 |
|
|
1,478,994 |
|
California Health Facilities Financing Authority, RB, |
|
|
170 |
|
|
182,650 |
|
California Health Facilities Financing Authority, |
|
|
890 |
|
|
1,012,402 |
|
Grossmont Union High School District, GO, Election of |
|
|
1,910 |
|
|
2,046,488 |
|
Los Angeles Department of Water & Power, RB, Power |
|
|
1,750 |
|
|
1,940,505 |
|
San Diego Regional Building Authority California, RB, |
|
|
1,600 |
|
|
1,782,208 |
|
State of California, GO, Various Purpose, 6.00%, |
|
|
1,275 |
|
|
1,514,470 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9,957,717 |
|
Colorado 1.2% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Colorado Health Facilities Authority, Refunding RB, |
|
|
1,095 |
|
|
1,212,056 |
|
Delaware 1.2% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
County of Sussex Delaware, RB, NRG Energy, Inc., |
|
|
1,230 |
|
|
1,275,190 |
|
District of Columbia 1.1% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
District of Columbia Water & Sewer Authority, RB, |
|
|
1,000 |
|
|
1,171,140 |
|
Florida 4.1% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange County Health Facilities Authority, RB, The |
|
|
780 |
|
|
856,830 |
|
Village Center Community Development District, RB, |
|
|
1,795 |
|
|
1,749,605 |
|
Village Community Development District No. 9, RB, |
|
|
895 |
|
|
904,827 |
|
Watergrass Community Development District, Special |
|
|
980 |
|
|
683,148 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,194,410 |
|
Georgia 1.9% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Municipal Electric Authority of Georgia, Refunding RB, |
|
|
1,565 |
|
|
1,899,206 |
|
Illinois 16.2% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Chicago Board of Education, GO, Series A: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5.50%, 12/01/39 |
|
|
1,000 |
|
|
1,133,080 |
|
5.00%, 12/01/41 |
|
|
1,640 |
|
|
1,755,768 |
|
Chicago Park District, GO, Harbor Facilities, Series C, |
|
|
975 |
|
|
1,075,620 |
|
Chicago Transit Authority, RB: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sales Tax Receipts, Series 2011, 5.25%, 12/01/31 |
|
|
1,060 |
|
|
1,213,160 |
|
Sales Tax Revenue, Series 2011, 5.25%, 12/01/36 |
|
|
310 |
|
|
346,580 |
|
City of Chicago Illinois, RB, Sales Tax Receipts, Series |
|
|
385 |
|
|
434,149 |
|
City of Chicago Illinois, Refunding RB, General, Third Lien, |
|
|
2,955 |
|
|
3,570,940 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Municipal Bonds |
|
Par |
|
Value |
|
||
Illinois (concluded) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Illinois Finance Authority, RB: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Navistar International, Recovery Zone, 6.50%, |
|
$ |
510 |
|
$ |
541,161 |
|
Rush University Medical Center Obligation Group, |
|
|
1,600 |
|
|
1,993,776 |
|
Illinois Finance Authority, Refunding RB, Series A: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Carle Foundation, 6.00%, 8/15/41 |
|
|
1,000 |
|
|
1,090,160 |
|
Northwestern Memorial Hospital, 6.00%, 8/15/39 |
|
|
1,900 |
|
|
2,185,171 |
|
Railsplitter Tobacco Settlement Authority, RB: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5.50%, 6/01/23 |
|
|
690 |
|
|
787,235 |
|
6.00%, 6/01/28 |
|
|
195 |
|
|
218,657 |
|
State of Illinois, RB, Build Illinois, Series B, 5.25%, |
|
|
125 |
|
|
138,416 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
16,483,873 |
|
Indiana 5.4% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Indiana Finance Authority Waste Water Utility, RB, First |
|
|
1,445 |
|
|
1,667,472 |
|
Indiana Municipal Power Agency, RB, Series B, 6.00%, |
|
|
2,210 |
|
|
2,520,505 |
|
Indianapolis Local Public Improvement Bond Bank, RB, |
|
|
1,140 |
|
|
1,312,938 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,500,915 |
|
Iowa 0.2% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Iowa Tobacco Settlement Authority, RB, Asset Backed, |
|
|
270 |
|
|
202,646 |
|
Kansas 1.8% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Kansas Development Finance Authority, Refunding RB, |
|
|
1,600 |
|
|
1,851,840 |
|
Kentucky 4.0% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Kentucky Economic Development Finance Authority, RB, |
|
|
660 |
|
|
728,746 |
|
Louisville & Jefferson County Metropolitan Government, |
|
|
1,500 |
|
|
1,749,525 |
|
Louisville & Jefferson County Metropolitan Government, |
|
|
1,450 |
|
|
1,556,154 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,034,425 |
|
Louisiana 0.8% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Louisiana Local Government Environmental Facilities & |
|
|
715 |
|
|
780,866 |
|
Maine 1.4% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Maine Health & Higher Educational Facilities Authority, |
|
|
1,270 |
|
|
1,454,671 |
|
Massachusetts 2.0% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Massachusetts Health & Educational Facilities Authority, |
|
|
1,000 |
|
|
1,174,430 |
|
Massachusetts State College Building Authority, RB, |
|
|
750 |
|
|
844,252 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,018,682 |
|
Michigan 3.4% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lansing Board of Water & Light, RB, Series A, 5.50%, |
|
|
915 |
|
|
1,062,297 |
|
Michigan State Building Authority, Refunding RB, Facilities |
|
|
1,000 |
|
|
1,143,710 |
|
Royal Oak Hospital Finance Authority Michigan, |
|
|
995 |
|
|
1,230,437 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,436,444 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
SEMI-ANNUAL REPORT |
JANUARY 31, 2012 |
23 |
|
|
|
|
Schedule of Investments (continued) |
BlackRock Municipal Income Investment Trust (BBF) |
(Percentages shown are based on Net Assets) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Municipal Bonds |
|
Par |
|
Value |
|
||
Nevada 5.2% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
City of Las Vegas Nevada, GO, Limited Tax, Performing |
|
$ |
1,600 |
|
$ |
1,866,960 |
|
County of Clark Nevada, RB, Series B, 5.75%, 7/01/42 |
|
|
3,075 |
|
|
3,450,273 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,317,233 |
|
New Jersey 5.6% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
New Jersey State Housing & Mortgage Finance Agency, |
|
|
1,165 |
|
|
1,249,649 |
|
New Jersey Transportation Trust Fund Authority, RB, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Series A, 5.88%, 12/15/38 |
|
|
1,295 |
|
|
1,486,479 |
|
Series A, 5.50%, 6/15/41 |
|
|
1,000 |
|
|
1,147,390 |
|
Series B, 5.25%, 6/15/36 |
|
|
1,650 |
|
|
1,856,497 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,740,015 |
|
New York 10.9% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hudson New York Yards Infrastructure Corp., RB, Series A, |
|
|
1,000 |
|
|
1,130,010 |
|
New York City Transitional Finance Authority, RB, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fiscal 2009, Series S-3, 5.25%, 1/15/39 |
|
|
1,500 |
|
|
1,658,835 |
|
Fiscal 2012, Sub-Series S-1A, 5.25%, 7/15/37 |
|
|
2,000 |
|
|
2,265,880 |
|
New York Liberty Development Corp., Refunding RB, |
|
|
605 |
|
|
654,913 |
|
New York State Dormitory Authority, ERB, Series B, |
|
|
3,250 |
|
|
3,638,277 |
|
Triborough Bridge & Tunnel Authority, RB, General, |
|
|
1,510 |
|
|
1,723,740 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
11,071,655 |
|
Pennsylvania 5.4% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pennsylvania Economic Development Financing |
|
|
500 |
|
|
580,760 |
|
Pennsylvania Turnpike Commission, RB, Sub-Series A: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5.63%, 12/01/31 |
|
|
1,500 |
|
|
1,717,020 |
|
6.00%, 12/01/41 |
|
|
1,500 |
|
|
1,673,385 |
|
Philadelphia Hospitals & Higher Education Facilities |
|
|
1,375 |
|
|
1,522,922 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,494,087 |
|
Puerto Rico 2.9% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Puerto Rico Sales Tax Financing Corp., RB, First |
|
|
2,605 |
|
|
2,915,776 |
|
Texas 13.1% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Central Texas Regional Mobility Authority, RB, Senior Lien, |
|
|
1,670 |
|
|
1,788,887 |
|
Conroe ISD Texas, GO, School Building, Series A, 5.75%, |
|
|
890 |
|
|
1,083,406 |
|
Harris County Cultural Education Facilities Finance |
|
|
640 |
|
|
731,821 |
|
Harris County Health Facilities Development Corp., |
|
|
500 |
|
|
601,195 |
|
Lower Colorado River Authority, RB: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5.50%, 5/15/19 (b) |
|
|
5 |
|
|
6,489 |
|
5.50%, 5/15/19 (b) |
|
|
80 |
|
|
103,370 |
|
5.50%, 5/15/33 |
|
|
1,915 |
|
|
2,171,265 |
|
North Texas Tollway Authority, RB: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Special Projects System, Series A, 5.50%, 9/01/41 |
|
|
1,670 |
|
|
1,931,054 |
|
System, First Tier, Series K-1 (AGC), 5.75%, 1/01/38 |
|
|
1,000 |
|
|
1,123,410 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Municipal Bonds |
|
Par |
|
Value |
|
||
Texas (concluded) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tarrant County Cultural Education Facilities Finance Corp., |
|
$ |
1,905 |
|
$ |
2,164,975 |
|
Texas Private Activity Bond Surface Transportation Corp., |
|
|
1,505 |
|
|
1,674,027 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
13,379,899 |
|
Virginia 1.2% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Virginia Public School Authority, RB, School Financing, |
|
|
1,000 |
|
|
1,182,870 |
|
Total Municipal Bonds 99.3% |
|
|
|
|
|
101,105,999 |
|
|
|||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
California 19.3% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
California Educational Facilities Authority, RB, University |
|
|
1,995 |
|
|
2,237,412 |
|
Grossmont Union High School District, GO, Election of |
|
|
2,400 |
|
|
2,623,944 |
|
Los Angeles Community College District California, GO, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Series A, 6.00%, 8/01/33 |
|
|
3,898 |
|
|
4,687,201 |
|
Series C, 5.25%, 8/01/39 |
|
|
2,630 |
|
|
3,013,717 |
|
Los Angeles Unified School District California, GO, |
|
|
400 |
|
|
439,980 |
|
San Diego Public Facilities Financing Authority, |
|
|
4,214 |
|
|
4,849,261 |
|
University of California, RB, Series O, 5.75%, 5/15/34 |
|
|
1,500 |
|
|
1,764,975 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
19,616,490 |
|
District of Columbia 3.7% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
District of Columbia, RB, Series A, 5.50%, 12/01/30 |
|
|
1,395 |
|
|
1,686,583 |
|
District of Columbia Water & Sewer Authority, RB, |
|
|
1,799 |
|
|
2,038,475 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,725,058 |
|
Illinois 3.3% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Illinois Finance Authority, RB, University of Chicago, |
|
|
2,800 |
|
|
3,332,896 |
|
Massachusetts 1.6% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Massachusetts State School Building Authority, RB, |
|
|
1,490 |
|
|
1,689,556 |
|
Nevada 5.2% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clark County Water Reclamation District, GO: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Limited Tax, 6.00%, 7/01/38 |
|
|
2,500 |
|
|
2,925,200 |
|
Series B, 5.50%, 7/01/29 |
|
|
1,994 |
|
|
2,345,510 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,270,710 |
|
New Hampshire 1.2% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
New Hampshire Health & Education Facilities Authority, |
|
|
1,094 |
|
|
1,252,406 |
|
New Jersey 2.1% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
New Jersey Transportation Trust Fund Authority, RB, |
|
|
2,000 |
|
|
2,171,180 |
|
New York 10.0% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
New York City Municipal Water Finance Authority, RB: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fiscal 2009, Series A, 5.75%, 6/15/40 |
|
|
1,410 |
|
|
1,647,217 |
|
Series FF-2, 5.50%, 6/15/40 |
|
|
1,994 |
|
|
2,296,410 |
|
New York Liberty Development Corp., RB, 1 World Trade |
|
|
2,205 |
|
|
2,504,946 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
24 |
SEMI-ANNUAL REPORT |
JANUARY 31, 2012 |
|
|
|
|
Schedule of Investments (continued) |
BlackRock Municipal Income Investment Trust (BBF) |
(Percentages shown are based on Net Assets) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Municipal Bonds Transferred to |
|
Par |
|
Value |
|
||
New York (concluded) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
New York Liberty Development Corp., Refunding RB, |
|
$ |
1,300 |
|
$ |
1,479,309 |
|
New York State Dormitory Authority, ERB, Series B, |
|
|
2,000 |
|
|
2,238,940 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10,166,822 |
|
Ohio 1.6% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
County of Allen Ohio, Refunding RB, Catholic Healthcare, |
|
|
1,560 |
|
|
1,660,526 |
|
Puerto Rico 1.0% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Puerto Rico Sales Tax Financing Corp., RB, Sales Tax, |
|
|
880 |
|
|
977,249 |
|
South Carolina 2.0% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
South Carolina State Public Service Authority, RB, Santee |
|
|
1,755 |
|
|
1,995,470 |
|
Texas 5.3% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
City of San Antonio Texas, Refunding RB, Series A, 5.25%, |
|
|
2,025 |
|
|
2,343,497 |
|
Harris County Cultural Education Facilities Finance Corp., |
|
|
2,750 |
|
|
3,073,758 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,417,255 |
|
Virginia 1.0% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fairfax County IDA Virginia, Refunding RB, Health Care, |
|
|
899 |
|
|
1,006,246 |
|
Wisconsin 1.7% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Wisconsin Health & Educational Facilities Authority, |
|
|
1,680 |
|
|
1,787,702 |
|
Total
Municipal Bonds Transferred to |
|
|
|
|
|
60,069,566 |
|
Total
Long-Term Investments |
|
|
|
|
|
161,175,565 |
|
|
|||||||
|
|
Shares |
|
|
|
|
|
FFI Institutional Tax-Exempt Fund, 0.01% (d)(e) |
|
|
3,319,178 |
|
|
3,319,178 |
|
Total
Short-Term Securities |
|
|
|
|
|
3,319,178 |
|
Total Investments (Cost $148,108,131) 161.6% |
|
|
|
|
|
164,494,743 |
|
Other Assets Less Liabilities 1.6% |
|
|
|
|
|
1,655,272 |
|
Liability for TOB Trust Certificates, Including |
|
|
|
|
|
(30,189,135 |
) |
VRDP Shares, at Liquidation Value (33.6)% |
|
|
|
|
|
(34,200,000 |
) |
Net Assets Applicable to Common Shares 100.0% |
|
|
|
|
$ |
101,760,880 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Counterparty |
|
Value |
|
Unrealized
|
|
||
JPMorgan Securities |
|
$ |
182,650 |
|
$ |
1,838 |
|
Citigroup Global Markets |
|
$ |
904,827 |
|
$ |
9,827 |
|
|
|
(b) |
US government securities, held in escrow, are used to pay interest on this security, as well as to retire the bond in full at the date indicated, typically at a premium to par. |
|
|
(c) |
Securities represent bonds transferred to a TOB in exchange for which the Trust acquired residual interest certificates. These securities serve as collateral in a financing transaction. See Note 1 of the Notes to Financial Statements for details of municipal bonds transferred to TOBs. |
|
|
(d) |
Investments in companies considered to be an affiliate of the Trust during the period, for purposes of Section 2(a)(3) of the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended, were as follows: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Affiliate |
|
Shares
Held |
|
Net |
|
Shares
Held |
|
Income |
|
||||
FFI Institutional |
|
|
2,119,108 |
|
|
1,200,070 |
|
|
3,319,178 |
|
$ |
431 |
|
|
|
(e) |
Represents the current yield as of report date. |
|
|
|
For Trust compliance purposes, the Trusts sector classifications refer to any 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 Trust management. These definitions may not apply for purposes of this report, which may combine such sector sub-classifications for reporting ease. |
|
|
|
Financial futures contracts sold as of January 31, 2012 were as follows: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Contracts |
|
Issue |
|
Exchange |
|
Expiration |
|
Notional |
|
Unrealized |
|
||
34 |
|
10-Year
US |
|
Chicago
|
|
March
|
|
$ |
4,496,500 |
|
$ |
(59,565 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Fair Value Measurements Various inputs are used in determining the fair value of investments and derivative financial instruments. These inputs are categorized into a disclosure hierarchy consisting of three broad levels for financial statement purposes as follows: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Level 1 unadjusted price quotations in active markets/exchanges for identical assets and liabilities |
|
|
|
|
|
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) |
|
|
|
|
|
Level 3 unobservable inputs based on the best information available in the circumstances, to the extent observable inputs are not available (including the Trusts own assumptions used in determining the fair value of investments and derivative financial instruments) |
Changes in valuation techniques may result in transfers in or out of an assigned level within the disclosure hierarchy. The categorization of a value determined for investments and derivative financial instruments is based on the pricing transparency of the investment and derivative financial instrument and does not necessarily correspond to the Trusts perceived risk of investing in those securities. For information about the Trusts policy regarding valuation of investments and derivative financial instruments and other significant accounting policies, please refer to Note 1 of the Notes to Financial Statements.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
SEMI-ANNUAL REPORT |
JANUARY 31, 2012 |
25 |
|
|
|
|
Schedule of Investments (concluded) |
BlackRock Municipal Income Investment Trust (BBF) |
The following tables summarize the inputs used as of January 31, 2012 in determining the fair valuation of the Trusts investments and derivative financial instruments:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Valuation Inputs |
|
Level 1 |
|
Level 2 |
|
Level 3 |
|
Total |
|
||||
Assets: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Investments: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Long-Term |
|
|
|
|
$ |
161,175,565 |
|
|
|
|
$ |
161,175,565 |
|
Short-Term |
|
$ |
3,319,178 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,319,178 |
|
Total |
|
$ |
3,319,178 |
|
$ |
161,175,565 |
|
|
|
|
$ |
164,494,743 |
|
|
|
1 |
See above Schedule of Investments for values in each state or political subdivision. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Valuation Inputs |
|
Level 1 |