What Is a 12b-1 Fund?

A 12b-1 fund is a mutual fund that charges its holders a 12b-1 fee. A 12b-1 fee pays for a mutual fund’s distribution and marketing costs. It is often used as a commission to brokers for selling the fund.

12b-1 funds take a portion of investment assets held and use them to pay expensive fees and distribution costs. These costs are included in the fund’s expense ratio and are described in the prospectus. 12b-1 fees are sometimes called a “level load.”

Understanding 12b-1 Funds

The name 12b-1 comes from the Investment Company Act of 1940’s Rule 12b-1, which allows fund companies to act as distributors of their own shares. Rule 12b-1 further states that a mutual fund’s own assets can be used to pay distribution charges.

Distribution fees include fees paid for marketing and selling fund shares, such as compensating brokers and others who sell fund shares and paying for advertising, the printing and mailing of prospectuses to new investors, and the printing and mailing of sales literature. The SEC does not limit the size of 12b-1 fees that funds may pay, but under FINRA rules, 12b-1 fees that are used to pay marketing and distribution expenses (as opposed to shareholder service expenses) cannot exceed 0.75% of a fund’s average net assets per year.

12b-1 Fees

Some 12b-1 plans also authorize and include “shareholder service fees,” which are fees paid to persons to respond to investor inquiries and provide investors with information about their investments. A fund may pay shareholder service fees without adopting a 12b-1 plan. If shareholder service fees are part of a fund’s 12b-1 plan, these fees will be included in this category of the fee table.

If shareholder service fees are paid outside a 12b-1 plan, then they will be included in the “Other expenses” category, discussed below. FINRA imposes an annual 0.25% cap on shareholder service fees (regardless of whether these fees are authorized as part of a 12b-1 plan).

Originally, the rule was intended to pay advertising and marketing expenses; today, however, a very small percentage of the fee tends to go toward these costs.

Special Considerations

12b-1 funds have fallen out of favor in recent years. The growth in exchange-traded fund (ETF) options and the subsequent growth of low-fee mutual fund options has given consumers a wide range of option. Notably, 12b-1 fees are considered a dead weight, and experts believe consumers who shop around can find comparable funds to ones charging 12b-1 fees.

What Is the Average Cost Basis Method?

The average cost basis method is a system of calculating the value of mutual fund positions held in a taxable account to determine the profit or loss for tax reporting. Cost basis represents the initial value of a security or mutual fund that an investor owns.

The average cost is then compared with the price at which the fund shares were sold to determine the gains or losses for tax reporting. The average cost basis is one of many methods that the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) allows investors to use to arrive at the cost of their mutual fund holdings.

Understanding the Average Cost Basis Method

The average cost basis method is commonly used by investors for mutual fund tax reporting. A cost basis method is reported with the brokerage firm where the assets are held. The average cost is calculated by dividing the total amount in dollars invested in a mutual fund position by the number of shares owned. For example, an investor that has $10,000 in an investment and owns 500 shares would have an average cost basis of $20 ($10,000 / 500).

Types of Cost Basis Methods

Although many brokerage firms default to the average cost basis method for mutual funds, there are other methods available.

FIFO

The first in, first out (FIFO) method means that when shares are sold, you must sell the first ones that you acquired first when calculating gains and losses. For example, let’s say an investor owned 50 shares and purchased 20 in January while purchasing 30 shares in April. If the investor sold 30 shares, the 20 in January must be used, and the remaining ten shares sold would come from the second lot purchased in April. Since both the January and April purchases would have been executed at different prices, the tax gain or loss would be impacted by the initial purchase prices in each period.

Also, if an investor has had an investment for more than one year, it would be considered a long-term investment. The IRS applies a lower capital gains tax to long-term investments versus short-term investments, which are securities or funds acquired in less than one year. As a result, the FIFO method would result in lower taxes paid if the investor had sold positions that were more than a year old.

LIFO

The last in first out (LIFO) method is when an investor can sell the most recent shares acquired first followed by the previously acquired shares. The LIFO method works best if an investor wants to hold onto the initial shares purchased, which might be at a lower price relative to the current market price.

High-Cost and Low-Cost Methods

The high-cost method allows investors to sell the shares that have the highest initial purchase price. In other words, the shares that were the most expensive to buy get sold first. A high-cost method is designed to provide investors with the lowest capital gains tax owed. For example, an investor might have a large gain from an investment, but doesn’t want to realize that gain yet, but needs money.

Having a higher cost means the difference between the initial price and the market price, when sold, will result in the smallest gain. Investors might also use the high-cost method if they want to take a capital loss, from a tax standpoint, to offset other gains or income.

Conversely, the low-cost method allows investors to sell the lowest-priced shares first. In other words, the cheapest shares you purchased get sold first. The low-cost method might be chosen if an investor wants to realize a capital gain on an investment.

Choosing a Cost-Basis Method

Once a cost basis method has been chosen for a specific mutual fund, it must remain in effect. Brokerage firms will provide investors with appropriate annual tax documentation on mutual fund sales based on their cost basis method elections.

Investors should consult a tax advisor or financial planner if they are uncertain about the cost basis method that will minimize their tax bill for substantial mutual fund holdings in taxable accounts. The average cost basis method may not always be the optimal method from a taxation point of view. Please note that the cost basis only becomes important if the holdings are in a taxable account, and the investor is considering a partial sale of the holdings.

Specific Identification Method

The specific identification method (also known as specific share identification) allows the investor to choose which shares are sold in order to optimize the tax treatment. For example, let’s say an investor purchases 20 shares in January and 20 shares in February. If the investor later sells 10 shares, they can choose to sell 5 shares from the January lot and 5 shares from the February lot.

Example of Cost Basis Comparisons

Cost basis comparisons can be an important consideration. Let’s say that an investor made the following consecutive fund purchases in a taxable account:

• 1,000 shares at $30 for a total of $30,000
• 1,000 shares at $10 for a total of $10,000
• 1,500 shares at $8 for a total of $12,000

The total amount invested equals $52,000, and the average cost basis is calculated by dividing $52,000 by 3,500 shares. The average cost is $14.86 per share.

Suppose the investor then sells 1,000 shares of the fund at $25 per share. The investor would have a capital gain of $10,140 using the average cost basis method. The gain or loss using average cost basis would be as follows:

• ($25 – $14.86) x 1,000 shares = $10,140.

Results can vary depending on the cost-basis method chosen for tax purposes:

• First in first out: ($25 – $30) x 1,000 shares = – $5,000
• Last in first out: ($25 – $8) x 1,000 = $17,000
• High cost: ($25 – $30) x 1,000 shares = – $5,000
• Low cost: ($25 – $8) x 1,000 = $17,000

From strictly a tax standpoint, the investor would be better off selecting the FIFO method or the high-cost method to calculate the cost basis before selling the shares. These methods would result in no tax on the loss. However, with the average cost basis method, the investor must pay a capital gains tax on the $10,140 in earnings.

Of course, if the investor sold the 1,000 shares using the FIFO method, there’s no guarantee that when the remaining shares are sold that $25 will be the selling price. The stock price could decrease, wiping out most of the capital gains and an opportunity to realize a capital gain would have been lost. As a result, investors must weigh the choice as to whether to take the gain today and pay the capital gains taxes or try to reduce their taxes and risk losing any unrealized gains on their remaining investment.

What Is the Annualized Income Installment Method?

Taxpayers who are self-employed typically pay quarterly installments of their estimated tax in four even amounts as figured by the regular installment method. Additionally, taxpayers should pay estimated taxes if they receive substantial dividends, interest, alimony, or other forms of income that are not subject to income tax withholding.

When a taxpayer has a fluctuating income, it often causes them to underpay on one or more of the quarterly estimates leading to underpayment penalties. The annualized income installment method calculates the taxpayer’s estimated tax installment payments and helps to decrease underpayment and corresponding underpayment penalties related to fluctuating income. Through the use of the annualized income installment method, taxpayers may estimate their taxes based on known information from the beginning of the tax year through the end of the period paid.

How the Annualized Income Installment Method Works

The purpose of the regular installment method is to figure in quarterly tax installments. It divides the annual estimated tax into four equal segments. The resulting payments are appropriate for the quarterly estimated taxes of taxpayers with a steady income, but this does not work as well for taxpayers whose income fluctuates. Some taxpayers may have a hard time finding the cash to pay estimated taxes in slower months.

Consider, for example, taxpayers Jane and John. Each of them owes $100,000 in annual estimated tax. Jane pays her estimated payments in four $25,000 installments per the regular installment method. She evenly earned her income, 25% each quarter, so the quarterly portions paid her estimated tax in full and on time. 

John’s earnings were uneven, with each tax quarter at 0%, 20%, 30%, and 50%, respectively. John may have a difficult time coming up with the cash necessary to make his first and second quarter estimated tax payments when his earnings are low. Using the regular installment method, if John were to pay less estimated tax in the first two quarters and more in the second two quarters, he would owe an underpayment penalty for the first two quarters.

The annualized income installment method allows John to refigure his installments, so they correlate to his income as he earns it. It does so by annualizing John’s installments over four overlapping periods. Each period begins on Jan. 1. The first period ends on March 31, the second ends on May 31, the third on Aug. 31, and the fourth period ends on Dec. 31. Each period includes all the previous periods, with the final period encompassing the entire year. It allows John to estimate his tax payments based on his income to that point in the year.

In this example, we know the exact percentage of John’s annual earnings from each tax quarter. John pays $0 in March, $20,000 in May, $30,000 in August, and $50,000 in December. John now has four installments of different amounts that, when added together, equal his full annual estimated tax of $100,000. John’s refigured installments are now paid on time, his underpayment penalties abated.

IRS Publication 505 has forms, schedules, and worksheets that guide taxpayers desiring to refigure their installments using the annualized income installment method. However, figuring installments this way is complicated and best done on an IRS worksheet by your favorite tax professional.

What Is an Alternative Depreciation System (ADS)?

An alternative depreciation system (ADS) is one of the methods the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) requires taxpayers to use to determine the depreciation allowed on business assets. An ADS has a depreciation schedule with a longer recovery period that generally better mirrors the asset’s income streams than declining balance depreciation. If the taxpayer elects to use an alternative depreciation system, they must apply it to all property of the same class placed in service during the same year.

Understanding when to use ADS is important for business owners because accurately calculating depreciation expenses can help lower business taxes. However, the IRS rules regarding ADS can be complex. For this reason, many business owners opt to hire a tax professional to ensure they take as much depreciation expense as the IRS allows.

Understanding Alternative Depreciation System (ADS)

Depreciation is an accounting method that allows businesses to spread out the cost of a physical asset over a specified number of years, which is known as the useful life of the asset. The useful life of an asset is an estimate of the number of years a company will use that asset to help generate revenue. The IRS allows businesses to depreciate many kinds of business assets, including computers and peripherals; office furniture, fixtures, and equipment; automobiles; and manufacturing equipment.

Taxpayers who elect to use the alternative depreciation system feel that the alternative schedule will allow for a better match of depreciation deductions against income than the recovery period under the general depreciation system. While the ADS method extends the number of years an asset can be depreciated, it also decreases the annual depreciation cost. The depreciation amount is set at an equal amount each year with the exception of the first and last years, which are generally lower because they do not include a full twelve months.

Alternative Depreciation System (ADS) vs. General Depreciation System (GDS)

For property placed in service after 1986, the IRS requires that taxpayers use the Modified Accelerated Cost Recovery System (MACRS) to depreciate property. There are two methods that fall under the MACRS: the general depreciation system (GDS) and the alternative depreciation system (ADS).

The alternative depreciation system offers depreciation over a longer period of time than the general depreciation system, which is a declining balance method. The general depreciation system is often used by companies to depreciate assets that tend to become obsolete quickly and are replaced with newer versions on a fairly frequent basis. Computers and phone equipment are examples of this.

The general depreciation system allows companies to accelerate the asset’s depreciation rate by recording a larger depreciation amount during the early years of an asset’s useful life and smaller amounts in later years. The general depreciation system is more commonly used than the alternative depreciation system.

Special Considerations

The tax implications of calculating depreciation can affect a company’s profitability. For this reason, business owners need to carefully consider the pros and cons of ADS versus GDS. Since the alternative depreciation system offers depreciation over a longer course of time, the yearly deductions for depreciation are smaller than with the other method. Taxpayers who choose the alternative depreciation system schedule must use this schedule for all property of the same class that was placed in service during the taxable year.

However, taxpayers may elect the alternative depreciation system schedule for real estate on a property-by-property basis. The alternative depreciation system recovery schedule is listed in IRS Publication 946.