Tax-Reform: Game Changer for Munis?

This Quick Takes explores potential tax changes of the new administration and their effects for holders of municipal bonds, specifically property and casualty insurers.

Potential tax changes appear aggressive for both individuals and corporations, yet tax-exempt municipal bond valuations are unlikely to change substantially relative to taxable alternatives. Market segmentation, specifically with respect to individual investors, should help keep municipal valuations in check. Regardless, corporate tax cuts would result in less favorable tax-adjusted muni yields for institutional investors though still competitive relative to taxable bond alternatives.

 

NEAM-group-summary-of-key-tax-proposals-which-could-impact-muni-bond-demand.jpg

 

NEAM-group-municipal-market-3.8-trillion.jpg

Market Driven by Individuals
The municipal market is dominated by individual investors who have tended to be less sensitive to yields relative to taxable alternatives. History has shown that personal income tax rates in the current range have not been a key driver of relative value in the muni market. One possible explanation for this is that the 50th percentile of retail owners has historically been in the 28% tax bracket (Exhibit 3), with a significant majority well below the current highest marginal tax rate. Many of these investors may reside in states with high state and local taxes where munis provide a significant tax shelter. If the Trump/House proposals come to fruition, the majority of retail investors will not experience a dramatic loss of tax-adjusted yield because they already fall below the proposed 33% Federal tax rate. Consequently, cuts in individual income tax rates of the magnitude currently being discussed aren’t likely to derail the muni market for any extended period of time.

NEAM-group-marginal-tax-rate-cohorts-of-retail-muni-investors.jpg

On the other hand, corporations that own municipals would accrue a smaller tax advantage if the discussed corporate tax policy is adopted. While proposed tax rate changes would not materially diminish municipal’s relative attractiveness for the majority of retail investors, municipals would be less attractive for corporations, such as property and casualty insurers. At lower tax rates, P&C companies will be more price sensitive with regard to adding tax-exempts than they are at the current 35% tax rate. Hence, at a hypothetical price, municipals would be significantly less attractive to P&C investors than they would be to retail investors, a circumstance that does not exist when both individual rates and corporate rates are as close to one another as they’ve been for the last 30 years. If the proposals in exhibit 1 (or similar) are eventually adopted, we would anticipate higher turnover in the sector, driven by institutional buyers who would be more likely to engage in “crossover” trading between taxables and tax-exempts.

 

Other Tax Considerations
Both the House and Trump propose elimination of the 3.8% Medicare surtax which would be a modest negative for munis as their income is exempt from the levy. Also, the House plan calls to tax individual income at half of ordinary income tax rates. This would amount to a 16.5% tax on interest from taxable investments for individuals in the highest proposed tax bracket, much lower than the current 43.4% rate. By lowering the tax rate on investment interest, tax-exempt yields would be less attractive on a comparative basis.

 

Uncertainty and its Premium
For years, the muni yield curve has remained steep, offering a generous premium to taxable alternatives when taking tax rates into account. A portion of that premium was offered to compensate investors for tax uncertainty in a high tax jurisdiction at a time when other advanced economies were lowering rates. Ultimately, lower tax rates reduce the embedded tax uncertainty premium in munis. As a result, taxable equivalent spreads should more closely approximate those of taxable alternatives, such as corporate bonds. As illustrated in Exhibit 4, AA rated municipal bonds should still offer additional tax-adjusted yield over single A rated corporate bonds in lower corporate tax scenarios, particularly in longer maturities.

 

NEAM-group-insurance-companies-AA-muni-taxable-equiv-yield-spreads.jpg

What’s Next?
The muni bond market has stabilized following the post-election sell-off, but we expect volatility to remain heightened as investors continue to discount the potential impact of lower tax rates. While history has shown that tax rates are not the primary driver of muni relative value, we do expect tax-related headline risk to remain elevated. Aside from tax risk, municipal credit remains on relatively solid footing and net supply is projected to remain manageable in 2017.


Key Takeaways

  • Muni market discounting heightened tax risk
  • Institutional investors more tax sensitive than individuals
  • Ongoing demand from individuals for tax-free income should keep relative valuations in check
  • Institutional demand could moderate; insurance companies, banks, etc.
  • Tax rate uncertainty diminishes at lower tax rates, as does expected spread
  • Muni spreads remain attractive relative to taxable alternatives in lower tax scenarios

 

 

Topics: Asset Classes, Property & Casualty Insurance, Quick Takes

All rights reserved. This publication has been prepared solely for general informational purposes and does not constitute investment advice or a recommendation with respect to any particular security, investment product or strategy. Nothing contained herein constitutes an offer to provide investment or money management services, nor is it an offer to buy or sell any security or financial instrument. NEAM does not offer legal advice and readers should consult their own independent legal advisors before relying on any information herein. The investment views expressed herein constitute judgments as of the date of this material and are subject to change at any time without notice. Future results may differ significantly from those stated in forward-looking statements, depending on factors such as changes in securities or financial markets or general economic conditions. While every effort has been made to ensure the accuracy of the information contained herein, neither New England Asset Management, Inc. (“NEAM, Inc.”) nor New England Asset Management Limited (together, “NEAM”) guarantee the completeness, accuracy or timeliness of this publication and any opinions contained herein are subject to change without notice. This publication may not be reproduced or disseminated in any form without express written permission. NEAM, Inc. is an SEC registered Investment Advisor located in Farmington, CT. This designation does not imply a certain level of skill or training. In the EU this publication is presented by New England Asset Management Limited, a wholly owned subsidiary of NEAM, Inc. with offices located in Dublin, Ireland and London, UK. New England Asset Management Limited is regulated by the Central Bank of Ireland. New England Asset Management Limited is authorised by the Central Bank of Ireland and subject to limited regulation by the Financial Conduct Authority. Details about the extent of our regulation by the Financial Conduct Authority are available from us on request. This is not an offer to conduct business in any jurisdiction in which New England Asset Management, Inc. and New England Asset Management Limited are not registered or authorized to conduct business.

 

 

Sign Up for NEAM Insights