Migratory Patterns – Thursday, 02/14/2013

Municipal Market Strategist James ColbyThe following commentary is written by James Colby, Senior Municipal Strategist for Van Eck’s non-taxable exchange-traded funds, and provided courtesy of Van Eck

Let’s give credit where credit is due. Recently, Forbes published an article that to some might seem like the kind of article that sits on the shelf until there is a slow news day and the editor is looking for a filler piece. In fact, this article raises a number of important points that, in my opinion, all touch upon the national economic recovery and just may be the locus of the revival of small business and wealth creation.

Why is this important to MUNI NATION? My concern is for the economic health — no, survival — of state and local governments that issue tax-exempt debt securities in order to meet the public needs of their inhabitants. The Forbes article points to migratory population shifts (measured in part by statistics from moving companies) that I believe will have very real consequences for certain states. As there is net “out migration,” there may typically be loss of tax revenues, user fees and consumption at the local level. Naturally, that may result in further belt-tightening for budgeting and, as we saw during the recession, jobs were cut and/or taxes were raised to meet those obligations already etched in stone. For some of the affected areas in the Rust Belt, I believe the consequences of the high cost of living and already high taxes will create painful decisions.

The article highlights the following, which might not come as a surprise, except that I believe it reflects the perpetuation of a disturbing long-term trend lawmakers should soon address.




Out Migration Rate*

New Jersey




New York











By contrast, the following states have the highest ratio of people migrating in: North Carolina, Oregon, South Carolina and Nevada. Surprisingly, Washington, D.C., reports Forbes, currently is the most popular destination for relocation. The area attracts highly educated professionals to high-tech and government-sponsored jobs.

All of the above makes, in my view, the case for investing in highly diversified products, such as low-cost ETFs, where any price adjustments resulting from the impact of migratory patterns should be de minimis, potentially avoiding over concentrations to those states where the impact might be the greatest.


Migration Study Map Image
*Source: United Van Lines 2012 Migration Study. Migration rate represents United Van Lines’ customers moving from one state to another during the course of the year.

Important Disclosure 

Van Eck Associates Corporation does not provide tax, legal or accounting advice. Investors should discuss their individual circumstances with appropriate professionals before making any decisions. This information should not be construed as sales or marketing material or an offer or solicitation for the purchase or sale of any financial instrument, product or service.

Please note that the information herein represents the opinion of Jim Colby and these opinions may change at any time and from time to time. Not intended to be a forecast of future events, a guarantee of future results or investment advice. Current market conditions may not continue. Non-Van Eck Global proprietary information contained herein has been obtained from sources believed to be reliable, but not guaranteed. No part of this material may be reproduced in any form, or referred to in any other publication, without express written permission of Van Eck Global. © 2012 Van Eck Securities Corporation. MUNI NATION is a service mark of Van Eck Associates Corporation.

All indices listed are unmanaged indices and do not reflect the payment of transaction costs, advisory fees or expenses that are associated with an investment in the Fund. An index’s performance is not illustrative of the Fund’s performance. Indices are not securities in which investments can be made.

Any discussion of specific securities mentioned in the commentary is neither an offer to sell nor a solicitation to buy these securities.

Municipal bonds are subject to risks related to litigation, legislation, political change, conditions in underlying sectors or in local business communities and economies, bankruptcy or other changes in the issuer’s financial condition, and/or the discontinuance of taxes supporting the project or assets or the inability to collect revenues for the project or from the assets. Bonds and bond funds will decrease in value as interest rates rise. Additional risks include credit, interest rate, call, reinvestment, tax, market and lease obligation risk. High-yield municipal bonds are subject to greater risk of loss of income and principal than higher-rated securities, and are likely to be more sensitive to adverse economic changes or individual municipal developments than those of higher-rated securities. Municipal bonds may be less liquid than taxable bonds.

The income generated from some types of municipal bonds may be subject to state and local taxes as well as to federal taxes on capital gains and may be subject to alternative minimum tax.

Investing involves substantial risk and high volatility, including possible loss of principal. Bonds and bond funds will decrease in value as interest rates rise. An investor should consider the investment objective, risks, charges and expenses of the Fund carefully before investing. To obtain a prospectus and summary prospectus, which contain this and other information, call 888.MKT.VCTR | 888.658.8287. Please read the prospectus and summary prospectus carefully before investing.  

Not FDIC Insured — No Bank Guarantee — May Lose Value 

Van Eck Securities Corporation, Distribution
335 Madison Avenue, 19th Floor
New York, NY 10017
888.MKT.VCTR | 888.658.8287

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *