Sunday, April 16, 2023

NJ Income Tax Exemption for Federal and State Obligations


There have been many threads over the years that have questioned how NJ Tax Law works for the exemption income derived from Federal Obligations (aka USGO) and NJ state-specific Obligations.

I created this post to summarize my current (as of April 2023) understanding of the law, the supporting documentation, and the impacts related to investing.

Context

  • NJ Gross Income Tax law regarding Federal and State Obligations is unique among the 50 states.
    • Do not apply what you hear about another state to NJ, it will be wrong.

    • In particular, the NJ Qualified Investment Fund (QIF) requirement is quite different than 50% threshold requirement imposed by the states of CA, NY and CT.
  • NJ defines Federal Income, also known as US Government Obligations (USGO), in the accepted manner of most other states. Vanguard and other brokerages annually publish data on the amounts of USGO held and portion of income derived from their funds. This is basis of all tax calculations discussed here.

Exempt Interest Income

  • Interest Income derived from Federal or NJ State Obligations are exempt from NJ Income tax.
    • But, if the income is received via a Mutual Fund, there is special treatment to be considered.
    • This special treatment is documented in the NJ GIT-5 by a concept called a Qualified Investment Fund (QIF)
    • The primary requirement is that the fund must invest 80% or more of its funds (other than cash or receivables) in securities that are exempt from New Jersey Income Tax.
    • Income from the fund derived from interest from US Government Obligations is exempt from NJ tax regardless of the fund's QIF status.
    • Income from the fund derived from interest from NJ State-Specific Exempt Obligations is exempt from NJ tax only if the fund is a QIF.

Capital Gains

  • Capital Gains (CG) from distributions or Disposal of Property (such as selling shares for a gain) of both NJ Obligations and USGO is exempt from NJ Income Tax.
    • If the CG is received via a Mutual Fund, the exemption is subject to the 80% threshold requirement for both NJ Obligations and USGO.
    • Note, Vanguard publishes which funds meet the NJ QIF threshold annually. I have had difficulty finding published reports from Fidelity.

IRA Withdrawals

  • NJ, allows an exemption for exempt income received via distributions from IRAs and 401K accounts. This a rare exemption only available in a few states.
  • This allowance is documented in the NJ GIT-1&2.
  • IRA distributions of USGO and NJ Exempt interest income are subject to the same rules as for taxable investments.
  • IRA CG distributions from mutual funds are subject to the same 80% threshold requirement for both NJ Obligations and USGO as for taxable investments.
  • I have started a thread on Bogleheads regarding this allowance and how to handle reporting in light of the limited guidance provided by the NJ Division of Taxation and the record keeping complexity suggested by the rules.

History of the QIF

This is my understanding from an old post to BH that I cannot find anymore.
The oddity here is that the QIF law was written nearly 3 decades ago and it applies to ALL exempt income, but a series of lawsuits resulted in the NJ Supreme Court recognizing that Federal obligations could not be subject to this limitation and still be in compliance with Federal law. Therefore, an exception was made for Federal obligations.
If you understand this context, the language in GIT-5 makes sense as it reflects the law as written, but adjusted by the Federal obligations caveat imposed by judicial review.

Examples

Treasury Money Market Fund 

  • The fund company publishes that 75% of the distributions are source by USGO.
  • The investor received $100 in dividends from the fund.
  • For that year, $75 would be exempt from NJ Gross Income Tax and $25 would be taxable.

Municipal Money Market Fund

  • The fund is a National Muni fund that invests in assets of all 50 states and various territories.
  • 1% of the distributions are source form NJ Exempt Obligations.
  • The investor receives $100 in dividends from the fund.
  • For that year, $0 would be exempt from NJ Gross Income Tax and all $100 would be taxable.
  • The income is still exempt from Federal Income taxes as expected.

NJ State-specific Municipal Money Market Fund

  • The fund is a NJ-specific Muni fund that invests in assets from NJ and other source.
  • 85% of the distributions are source form NJ Exempt Obligations and 8% are source from USGO.
  • The investor receives $100 in dividends from the fund.
  • For that year, $93 would be exempt from NJ Gross Income Tax and $7 would be taxable.

Short-term US Treasury Bond Fund

  • The fund invests 100% of it assets in short-term US Treasury bills and notes.
  • The investor receives $100 in dividends and STCG distributions and $15 in LTCG distributions.
  • For that year, $115 would be exempt from NJ Gross Income Tax and $0 would be taxable.

Total Bond Market Index Fund

  • The fund invests 35% of it assets in various US Treasury bills and notes
  • The investor receives $100 in dividends and STCG distributions and $15 in LTCG distributions.
  • For that year, $35 would be exempt from NJ Gross Income Tax and $80 would be taxable.
  • The LTCG are not exempt from tax as the fund does not meet the QIF criteria.
  • As best I can tell, STCG are not separated out by the 1099 reporting, so I just treat them as dividends. This may not be technically correct.

Total Stock Market Index Fund

  • The index fund invests 1% of it assets in various US Treasury bills and notes as part of the funds daily liquidity needs.
  • The investor receives $100 in dividends and $2 in LTCG.
  • For that year, $1 dividends would be exempt from NJ Gross Income Tax and $99 would be taxable.
  • The $2 LTCG would not be exempt from tax as the fund does not meet the QIF criteria, thus taxable.

Saturday, February 25, 2023

CA 9.3%, Federal 27.8% using 2/24/23 rate History

  Muni's almost never make sense for investors under the 35.8% marginal rate and for some reason VCTXX performs even worse for "low tax rate" investors. Here is is a telltale chart for the last year using your tax rates and assuming VUSXX is at 95% USGO, instead of 100% This chart shows relative returns for VMFXX, VMSXX, VCTXX vs. VSUXX over the past year.

Friday, February 17, 2023

Fidelity Back-test for 1-day vs. 7-day yields

Okay, so I was asked what if we had 1-day yield history, would it make much difference?

So, I took that challenge to create a back-test. Here is what I did:

1.) I started with MM Optimizer v2 and set it to run for 365 days ending 2/17/23

2.) I downloaded from fidelity.com daily and 7-day SEC  yields for four similar fidelity funds to the 4 general funds from Vanguard:

VMRXX -> FDRXX

VFMXX -> SPAXX

VUSXX -> FDLXX

VMSXX -> FTEXX

* I deliberately chose the entry level versions of the Fidelity funds for consistency. I know there are other share classes with lower ER and higher returns, but I wanted consistency over highest rate. This is a good time to point out that this back-test is not really the one to look at regarding Fidelity vs. Vanguard. That can probably be done straight off expense ratios as otherwise these funds are very similar, except that Fido appears to be using Repos even more than Vanguard.

3.) I updated the USGO% in the back-test sheet to match the values reported by Fidelity for these funds.

4.) My tool normally pulls straight from the Vanguard site, so I manually replaced the back-test data with the Fidelity fund yields in the My Tranch sheet (this populates all the other tranches yield data).

5.) I ran it for a NJ tax-base as I didn't want to introduce the complexity of the state-specific funds. They normally don't win often, so I don't think it makes much difference.

6.) Voila, I have an Optimize Study for the Fidelity funds that is in all respects that same as the Vanguard study. I executed this once for 1-day yields and once for 7-day yields

I produced two reports:

1.) A simple comparison of the results of the 1-day test vs. 7-day test of Fidelity, with a difference calculation This should be sufficient to demonstrate if there anything to learn from the back-test. Note that Tranch A2 is a simple swap between the Treasury Fund and the Muni Fund. For the pure test of Muni/Treasury swapping this is the most important test case.

MM Optimizer v2 - Fidelity-7day - 1vs7 Compare.pdf

2.) I provide a sample of the 7-day back-test for Vanguard funds with all the same parameters set.

MM Optimizer v2 - Vanguard 7 day.pdf

Bottom line, I don't think the 1-day yields matter much. The resulting calculated back-test yields are bit higher, but that is expected since rates have consistently risen during the test period so rolling 7 day yields are bit behind all the time. This doesn't change the value proposition of the swapping though. Also, the magnitude of the benefit did go up slightly across the entire test, but relative value is still about the same from one tax rate to another. High tax investors get more benefit and low tax investors really see no benefit and twice as many swap events.

For very high tax rates and only swapping between Muni/Treasury, the relative improvement was the greatest. The one day yields allow a $13/swap improvement with only 10 swaps required over the year.

For lower tax rates, the value of swapping actually decreased.

SIFMA Swap Index

 


Thursday, February 16, 2023

Money Market Optimizer Version 1

This is my first post to a new blog. It is a link to my Money Market Optimizer v1. I shared it on Bogleheads today, but I will put a link here too: MM Optimizer v1