The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) is on the verge of allowing major changes to the way exchange-traded funds (ETFs) and traditional mutual funds are structured.
Specifically, an SEC ruling could allow dozens of asset managers to offer existing mutual funds as ETF share classes.
That might sound like technical minutiae … a distinction without a difference. Investors already have thousands of ETFs and mutual funds from which to choose. What difference would it make if the ETFs themselves were simply a share class of a mutual fund?
From just $107.88 $24.99 for Kiplinger Personal Finance
Become a smarter, better informed investor. Subscribe from just $107.88 $24.99, plus get up to 4 Special Issues
Sign up for Kiplinger’s Free Newsletters
Profit and prosper with the best of expert advice on investing, taxes, retirement, personal finance and more - straight to your e-mail.
Profit and prosper with the best of expert advice - straight to your e-mail.
Some of this comes down to taxes. There are very real differences in the ways that ETFs and mutual funds are taxed, so the SEC's decision — expected to come down within the next several months — will matter a lot for most folks investing in a regular taxable brokerage account.
It's also a potential win for fund managers, as it opens their existing strategies to a broader pool of investors.
Are there benefits for investors? Are there any drawbacks that investors should be aware of?
Let's take a look.
What is the SEC considering when it comes to mutual funds and ETFs?
It's normal for mutual funds to have multiple share classes that vary based on fees, sales loads or account minimums.
Back in the early 2000s, Vanguard patented a clever setup that let an exchange-traded fund be just another share class of an existing mutual fund.
This meant one mutual fund could offer both traditional mutual fund shares and ETF shares that were both backed by the same underlying portfolio, management and performance record.
That patent expired in 2023, leading to a flood of requests from other fund managers. To date, more than 60 have petitioned the SEC for regulatory relief that will allow them to issue ETFs as share classes of existing mutual funds.
The SEC doesn't have a reputation for moving quickly. As with most government regulators, there is a process, and that process is often slow and bureaucratic.
We're starting to see movement, though. In March, then-Acting SEC Chairman Mark Uyeda instructed staff to prioritize reviewing these petitions.
Given the Trump administration's preference for deregulation, the likelihood is that a decision will happen within the next few months that will open the floodgates for ETF share classes of existing mutual funds.
Why do mutual funds want ETF share classes?
There are plenty of reasons for fund companies to petition the SEC to allow for ETF share classes of mutual funds.
To start, this allows them to keep their track record of fund performance, which in some cases can stretch back decades, as the ETF would be considered part of the existing fund as opposed to a new one.
This would also be true of existing ETFs that wanted to offer mutual funds for 401(k) plans. As things stand now, an ETF with a great long-term performance wouldn't be able to mention the track record if an identical strategy was created in a mutual fund format.
It's also potentially cheaper and faster to create a new share class than to launch an entirely new product.
But mostly, it's about taxes.
Mutual funds and ETFs are taxed differently because of how investor flows are handled.
In a mutual fund, when investors redeem shares, the fund often has to sell securities to raise cash. Those sales can generate realized capital gains, which must be distributed to all shareholders — whether they sold shares or not — creating a potential tax bill for all fund holders.
I sell my shares, and you get stuck with the tax bill. It's not exactly an ideal situation.
By contrast, ETFs use the in-kind creation/redemption process. Large institutional investors can exchange baskets of the underlying stocks for ETF shares (and vice versa) without the fund selling holdings.
This allows ETFs to get rid of appreciated securities without triggering taxable gains inside the portfolio and soaking their investors.
Because Vanguard had ETFs as share classes of its existing mutual funds, its mutual funds were able to piggyback on the ETFs' tax advantages. The Vanguard 500 Index Fund (VFIAX), for instance, hasn't paid a capital gains distribution since 2003.
Why this matters to investors
It's always nice to have options at your disposal, and having an ETF version of your favorite mutual funds isn't a bad thing.
Existing investors in mutual funds might also get a tax break. As we saw in the case of the Vanguard S&P 500 index fund, the mutual fund was able to shift would-be capital gains into its ETF share class and avoid making capital gains distributions.
Other mutual funds could potentially be able to do the same, though it should be mentioned that having an ETF structure of an existing fund doesn't guarantee that capital gains distributions will be eliminated.
If a fund manager trades aggressively to the extent that the gains can't be offset by in-kind redemptions, there might still be taxable distributions to deal with.
It can also go the other way. Just as mutual fund investors might benefit from ETF tax efficiency, exchange-traded fund investors could end up dealing with mutual fund tax inefficiency if the assets are comingled.
This would be a particular risk in cases in which the ETF share class was a relatively small part of the overall fund and the fund generated substantial realized capital gains.
In a tax-advantaged account such as an IRA or 401(k), none of this is a major concern. A tax-paying investor should consider this, particularly for a new ETF share class of a large existing mutual fund that does a lot of active trading.
Related content
-
I'm want to give my 3 grandkids $5K each for Christmas.You're comfortably retired and want to give your grandkids a big Christmas check, but their parents are worried they might spend it all. We ask the pros for help.
-
If You're Not Doing Roth Conversions, You Need to Read ThisRoth conversions and other Roth strategies can be complex, but don't dismiss these tax planning tools outright. They could really work for you and your heirs.
-
Could Traditional Retirement Expectations Be Killing Us?A retirement psychologist makes the case: A fulfilling retirement begins with a blueprint for living, rather than simply the accumulation of a large nest egg.
-
I'm a Financial Planner: If You're Not Doing Roth Conversions, You Need to Read This
Roth conversions and other Roth strategies can be complex, but don't dismiss these tax planning tools outright. They could really work for you and your heirs.
-
Could Traditional Retirement Expectations Be Killing Us? A Retirement Psychologist Makes the Case
A retirement psychologist makes the case: A fulfilling retirement begins with a blueprint for living, rather than simply the accumulation of a large nest egg.
-
I'm a Financial Adviser: This Is How You Can Adapt to Social Security UncertaintyRather than letting the unknowns make you anxious, focus on building a flexible income strategy that can adapt to possible future Social Security changes.
-
I'm a Financial Planner for Millionaires: Here's How to Give Your Kids Cash Gifts Without Triggering IRS PaperworkMost people can gift large sums without paying tax or filing a return, especially by structuring gifts across two tax years or splitting gifts with a spouse.
-
'Boomer Candy' Investments Might Seem Sweet, But They Can Have a Sour AftertasteProducts such as index annuities, structured notes and buffered ETFs might seem appealing, but sometimes they can rob you of flexibility and trap your capital.
-
AI Stocks Lead Nasdaq's 398-Point Nosedive: Stock Market TodayThe major stock market indexes do not yet reflect the bullish tendencies of sector rotation and broadening participation.
-
Got $100 to Gamble? These Penny Stocks Could Be Worth the RideVolatile penny stocks are high-risk plays with potentially high rewards. If you have $100 you can afford to lose, these three names are worth a look.
-
Quick Question: Are You Planning for a 20-Year Retirement or a 30-Year Retirement?You probably should be planning for a much longer retirement than you are. To avoid running out of retirement savings, you really need to make a plan.
