The Trust’s Trustees and officers are listed below, together with their principal occupations and other directorships they have held during at least the past five years. Trustees who are interested persons of the Trust within the meaning of the 1940 Act are referred to as Interested Trustees. Trustees who are not interested persons of the Trust are referred to as Independent Trustees. Each of the Trustees serves as a Trustee of each of the 45 U.S. registered investment portfolios for which Amundi Pioneer serves as investment adviser (the “Pioneer Funds”). The address for all Trustees and all officers of the Trust 60 State Street, Boston, Massachusetts 02109.
The Statement of Additional Information of the Trust includes additional information about the Trustees and is available, without charge, upon request, by calling 1-800-225-6292.
* Ms. Jones and Mr. Taubes are Interested Trustees because they are officers or directors of the Trust’s investment adviser and certain of its affiliates.
This page was intentionally left blank.
This page was intentionally left blank.
This page was intentionally left blank.
This page was intentionally left blank.
We are pleased to offer a variety of convenient ways for you to contact us for assistance or information.
For additional information, please contact your investment advisor or visit our web site www.amundipioneer.com/us.
The Trust files a complete schedule of portfolio holdings with the Securities and Exchange Commission for the first and third quarters of each fiscal year as an exhibit to its reports on Form N-PORT. Shareowners may view the filed Form N-PORT by visiting the Commission’s web site at https://www.sec.gov.
Amundi Pioneer Asset Management, Inc.
60 State Street
Boston, MA 02109
www.amundipioneer.com/us
Securities offered through Pioneer Funds Distributor, Inc.
60 State Street, Boston, MA 02109
Underwriter of Pioneer Mutual Funds, Member SIPC
© 2020 Amundi Pioneer Asset Management 19206-14-0520
ITEM 2. CODE OF ETHICS.
(a) Disclose whether, as of the end of the period covered by the report, the registrant has adopted a code of ethics that applies to the registrant’s principal executive officer, principal financial officer, principal accounting officer or controller, or persons performing similar functions, regardless of whether these individuals are employed by the registrant or a third party. If the registrant has not adopted such a code of ethics, explain why it has not done so.
The registrant has adopted, as of the end of the period covered by this report, a code of ethics that applies to the registrant’s principal executive officer, principal financial officer, principal accounting officer and controller.
(b) For purposes of this Item, the term “code of ethics” means written standards that are reasonably designed to deter wrongdoing and to promote:
(1) Honest and ethical conduct, including the ethical handling of actual or apparent conflicts of interest between personal and professional relationships;
(2) Full, fair, accurate, timely, and understandable disclosure in reports and documents that a registrant files with, or submits to, the Commission and in other public communications made by the registrant;
(3) Compliance with applicable governmental laws, rules, and regulations;
(4) The prompt internal reporting of violations of the code to an appropriate person or persons identified in the code; and
(5) Accountability for adherence to the code.
(c) The registrant must briefly describe the nature of any amendment, during the period covered by the report, to a provision of its code of ethics that applies to the registrant’s principal executive officer, principal financial officer, principal accounting officer or controller, or persons performing similar functions, regardless of whether these individuals are employed by the registrant or a third party, and that relates to any element of the code of ethics definition enumerated in paragraph (b) of this Item. The registrant must file a copy of any such amendment as an exhibit pursuant to Item 10(a), unless the registrant has elected to satisfy paragraph (f) of this Item by posting its code of ethics on its website pursuant to paragraph (f)(2) of this Item, or by undertaking to provide its code of ethics to any person without charge, upon request, pursuant to paragraph (f)(3) of this Item.
The registrant has made no amendments to the code of ethics during the period covered by this report.
(d) If the registrant has, during the period covered by the report, granted a waiver, including an implicit waiver, from a provision of the code of ethics to the registrant’s principal executive officer, principal financial officer, principal accounting officer or controller, or persons performing similar functions, regardless of whether these individuals are employed by the registrant or a third party, that relates to one or more of the items set forth in paragraph (b) of this Item, the registrant must briefly describe the nature of the waiver, the name of the person to whom the waiver was granted, and the date of the waiver.
Not applicable.
(e) If the registrant intends to satisfy the disclosure requirement under paragraph (c) or (d) of this Item regarding an amendment to, or a waiver from, a provision of its code of ethics that applies to the registrant’s principal executive officer, principal financial officer, principal accounting officer or controller, or persons performing similar functions and that relates to any element of the code of ethics definition
enumerated in paragraph (b) of this Item by posting such information on its Internet website, disclose the registrant’s Internet address and such intention.
Not applicable.
(f) The registrant must:
(1) File with the Commission, pursuant to Item 12(a)(1), a copy of its code of ethics that applies to the registrant’s principal executive officer,principal financial officer, principal accounting officer or controller, or persons performing similar functions, as an exhibit to its annual report on this Form N-CSR (see attachment);
(2) Post the text of such code of ethics on its Internet website and disclose, in its most recent report on this Form N-CSR, its Internet address and the fact that it has posted such code of ethics on its Internet website; or
(3) Undertake in its most recent report on this Form N-CSR to provide to any person without charge, upon request, a copy of such code of ethics and explain the manner in which such request may be made. See Item 10(2)
ITEM 3. AUDIT COMMITTEE FINANCIAL EXPERT.
(a) (1) Disclose that the registrant’s board of trustees has determined that the registrant either:
(i) Has at least one audit committee financial expert serving on its audit committee; or
(ii) Does not have an audit committee financial expert serving on its audit committee.
The registrant’s Board of Trustees has determined that the registrant has at least one audit committee financial expert.
(2) If the registrant provides the disclosure required by paragraph (a)(1)(i) of this Item, it must disclose the name of the audit committee financial expert and whether that person is “independent.” In order to be considered “independent” for purposes of this Item, a member of an audit committee may not, other than in his or her capacity as a member of the audit committee, the board of trustees, or any other board committee:
(i) Accept directly or indirectly any consulting, advisory, or other compensatory fee from the issuer; or
(ii) Be an “interested person” of the investment company as defined in Section 2(a)(19) of the Act (15 U.S.C. 80a-2(a)(19)).
Mr. Fred J. Ricciardi, an independent trustee, is such an audit committee financial expert.
(3) If the registrant provides the disclosure required by paragraph (a)(1) (ii) of this Item, it must explain why it does not have an audit committee financial expert.
Not applicable.
ITEM 4. PRINCIPAL ACCOUNTANT FEES AND SERVICES.
(a) Disclose, under the caption AUDIT FEES, the aggregate fees billed for each of the last two fiscal years for professional services rendered by the principal accountant for the audit of the registrant’s annual financial statements or services that are normally provided by the accountant in connection with statutory and regulatory filings or engagements for those fiscal years.
The audit fees for the Trust were $38,500 payable to Ernst & Young LLP for the year ended March 31, 2020 and $38,500 for the year ended March 31, 2019.
(b) Disclose, under the caption AUDIT-RELATED FEES, the aggregate fees billed in each of the last two fiscal years for assurance and related services by the principal accountant that are reasonably related to the performance of the audit of the registrant’s financial statements and are not reported under paragraph (a) of this Item. Registrants shall describe the nature of the services comprising the fees disclosed under this category.
There were no audit-related services in 2020 or 2019.
(c) Disclose, under the caption TAX FEES, the aggregate fees billed in each of the last two fiscal years for professional services rendered by the principal accountant for tax compliance, tax advice, and tax planning. Registrants shall describe the nature of the services comprising the fees disclosed under this category.
The tax fees for the Trust were $9,739 payable to Ernst & Young LLP for the year ended March 31, 2020 and $9,739 for the year ended March 31, 2019.
(d) Disclose, under the caption ALL OTHER FEES, the aggregate fees billed in each of the last two fiscal years for products and services provided by the principal accountant, other than the services reported in paragraphs (a) through (c) of this Item. Registrants shall describe the nature of the services comprising the fees disclosed under this category.
There were no other fees in 2020 or 2019.
(e) (1) Disclose the audit committee’s pre-approval policies and procedures described in paragraph (c)(7) of Rule 2-01 of Regulation S-X.
PIONEER FUNDS
APPROVAL OF AUDIT, AUDIT-RELATED, TAX AND OTHER SERVICES
PROVIDED BY THE INDEPENDENT AUDITOR
SECTION I - POLICY PURPOSE AND APPLICABILITY
The Pioneer Funds recognize the importance of maintaining the independence of their outside auditors. Maintaining independence is a shared responsibility involving Amudi Pioneer Asset Management, Inc, the audit committee and the independent auditors.
The Funds recognize that a Fund’s independent auditors: 1) possess knowledge of the Funds, 2) are able to incorporate certain services into the scope of the audit, thereby avoiding redundant work, cost and disruption of Fund personnel and processes, and 3) have expertise that has value to the Funds. As a result, there are situations where it is desirable to use the Fund’s independent auditors for services in addition to the annual audit and where the potential for conflicts of interests are minimal. Consequently, this policy, which is intended to comply with Rule 210.2-01(C)(7), sets forth guidelines and procedures to be followed by the Funds when retaining the independent audit firm to perform audit, audit-related tax and
other services under those circumstances, while also maintaining independence.
Approval of a service in accordance with this policy for a Fund shall also constitute approval for any other Fund whose pre-approval is required pursuant to Rule 210.2-01(c)(7)(ii).
In addition to the procedures set forth in this policy, any non-audit services that may be provided consistently with Rule 210.2-01 may be approved by the Audit Committee itself and any pre-approval that may be waived in accordance with Rule 210.2-01(c)(7)(i)(C) is hereby waived.
Selection of a Fund’s independent auditors and their compensation shall be determined by the Audit Committee and shall not be subject to this policy.
| | | |
| SECTION II - POLICY |
| |
SERVICE CATEGORY | SERVICE CATEGORY DESCRIPTION | SPECIFIC PRE-APPROVED SERVICE SUBCATEGORIES |
| | | |
I. AUDIT SERVICES | Services that are directly | o Accounting research assistance |
| | related to performing the | o SEC consultation, registration |
| | independent audit of the Funds | statements, and reporting |
| | | o Tax accrual related matters |
| | | o Implementation of new accounting standards |
| | | o Compliance letters (e.g. rating agency letters) |
| | | o Regulatory reviews and assistance |
| | | regarding financial matters |
| | | o Semi-annual reviews (if requested) |
| | | o Comfort letters for closed end offerings |
II. AUDIT-RELATED | Services which are not | o AICPA attest and agreed-upon procedures |
SERVICES | prohibited under Rule | o Technology control assessments |
| | 210.2-01(C)(4) (the “Rule”) | o Financial reporting control assessments |
| | and are related extensions of | o Enterprise security architecture |
| | the audit services support the | assessment |
| | audit, or use the knowledge/expertise | |
| | gained from the audit procedures as a | |
| | foundation to complete the project. | |
| | In most cases, if the Audit-Related | |
| | Services are not performed by the | |
| | Audit firm, the scope of the Audit | |
| | Services would likely increase. | |
| | The Services are typically well-defined | |
| | and governed by accounting | |
| | professional standards (AICPA, | |
| | SEC, etc.) | |
| | |
AUDIT COMMITTEE APPROVAL POLICY | AUDIT COMMITTEE REPORTING POLICY |
| o “One-time” pre-approval | o A summary of all such |
| for the audit period for all | services and related fees |
| pre-approved specific service | reported at each regularly |
| subcategories. Approval of the | scheduled Audit Committee |
| independent auditors as | meeting. |
| auditors for a Fund shall | |
| constitute pre approval for | |
| these services. | |
| |
| o “One-time” pre-approval | o A summary of all such |
| for the fund fiscal year within | services and related fees |
| a specified dollar limit | (including comparison to |
| for all pre-approved | specified dollar limits) |
| specific service subcategories | reported quarterly. |
| |
| o Specific approval is | |
| needed to exceed the | |
| pre-approved dollar limit for | |
| these services (see general | |
| Audit Committee approval policy | |
| below for details on obtaining | |
| specific approvals) | |
| |
| o Specific approval is | |
| needed to use the Fund’s | |
| auditors for Audit-Related | |
| Services not denoted as | |
| “pre-approved”, or | |
| to add a specific service | |
| subcategory as “pre-approved” | |
SECTION III - POLICY DETAIL, CONTINUED
| | |
SERVICE CATEGORY | SERVICE CATEGORY DESCRIPTION | SPECIFIC PRE-APPROVED SERVICE |
| | | SUBCATEGORIES |
III. TAX SERVICES | Services which are not | o Tax planning and support |
| | prohibited by the Rule, | o Tax controversy assistance |
| | if an officer of the Fund | o Tax compliance, tax returns, excise |
| | determines that using the | tax returns and support |
| | Fund’s auditor to provide | o Tax opinions |
| | these services creates | |
| | significant synergy in | |
| | the form of efficiency, | |
| | minimized disruption, or | |
| | the ability to maintain a | |
| | desired level of | |
| | confidentiality. | |
| | |
| AUDIT COMMITTEE APPROVAL POLICY | AUDIT COMMITTEE REPORTING POLICY |
o “One-time” pre-approval | o A summary of |
for the fund fiscal year | all such services and |
within a specified dollar limit | related fees |
| | (including comparison |
| | to specified dollar |
| | limits) reported |
| | quarterly. |
| |
o Specific approval is | |
| needed to exceed the | |
| pre-approved dollar limits for | |
| these services (see general | |
| Audit Committee approval policy | |
| below for details on obtaining | |
| specific approvals) | |
| |
o Specific approval is | |
| needed to use the Fund’s | |
| auditors for tax services not | |
| denoted as pre-approved, or to | |
| add a specific service subcategory as | |
| “pre-approved” | |
SECTION III - POLICY DETAIL, CONTINUED
| |
SERVICE CATEGORY | SERVICE CATEGORY DESCRIPTION | SPECIFIC PRE-APPROVED SERVICE |
| | | SUBCATEGORIES |
IV. OTHER SERVICES | Services which are not | o Business Risk Management support |
| | prohibited by the Rule, | o Other control and regulatory |
A. SYNERGISTIC, | if an officer of the Fund | compliance projects |
UNIQUE QUALIFICATIONS | determines that using the | |
| | Fund’s auditor to provide | |
| | these services creates | |
| | significant synergy in | |
| | the form of efficiency, | |
| | minimized disruption, | |
| | the ability to maintain a | |
| | desired level of | |
| | confidentiality, or where | |
| | the Fund’s auditors | |
| | posses unique or superior | |
| | qualifications to provide | |
| | these services, resulting | |
| | in superior value and | |
| | results for the Fund. | |
| | |
AUDIT COMMITTEE APPROVAL POLICY | AUDIT COMMITTEE REPORTING POLICY |
o “One-time” pre-approval | o A summary of |
| for the fund fiscal year within | all such services and |
| a specified dollar limit | related fees |
| | (including comparison |
| | to specified dollar |
| | limits) reported |
| | quarterly. |
o Specific approval is | |
| needed to exceed the | |
| pre-approved dollar limits for | |
| these services (see general | |
| Audit Committee approval policy | |
| below for details on obtaining | |
| specific approvals) | |
| |
o Specific approval is | |
| needed to use the Fund’s | |
| auditors for “Synergistic” or | |
| “Unique Qualifications” Other | |
| Services not denoted as | |
| pre-approved to the left, or to | |
| add a specific service | |
| subcategory as “pre-approved” | |
SECTION III - POLICY DETAIL, CONTINUED
| |
SERVICE CATEGORY | SERVICE CATEGORY DESCRIPTION | SPECIFIC PROHIBITED SERVICE |
| | | SUBCATEGORIES |
PROHIBITED SERVICES | Services which result | 1. Bookkeeping or other services |
| | in the auditors losing | related to the accounting records or |
| | independence status | financial statements of the audit |
| | under the Rule. | client* |
| | | 2. Financial information systems design |
| | | and implementation* |
| | | 3. Appraisal or valuation services, |
| | | fairness* opinions, or |
| | | contribution-in-kind reports |
| | | 4. Actuarial services (i.e., setting |
| | | actuarial reserves versus actuarial |
| | | audit work)* |
| | | 5. Internal audit outsourcing services* |
| | | 6. Management functions or human |
| | | resources |
| | | 7. Broker or dealer, investment |
| | | advisor, or investment banking services |
| | | 8. Legal services and expert services |
| | | unrelated to the audit |
| | | 9. Any other service that the Public |
| | | Company Accounting Oversight Board |
| | | determines, by regulation, is |
| | | impermissible |
| | |
AUDIT COMMITTEE APPROVAL POLICY | AUDIT COMMITTEE REPORTING POLICY |
o These services are not to be | o A summary of all |
| performed with the exception of the(*) | services and related |
| services that may be permitted | fees reported at each |
| if they would not be subject to audit | regularly scheduled |
| procedures at the audit client (as | Audit Committee meeting |
| defined in rule 2-01(f)(4)) level | will serve as continual |
| the firm providing the service. | confirmation that has |
| | not provided any |
| | restricted services. |
GENERAL AUDIT COMMITTEE APPROVAL POLICY:
o For all projects, the officers of the Funds and the Fund’s auditors will each make an assessment to determine that any proposed projects will not impair independence.
o Potential services will be classified into the four non-restricted service categories and the “Approval of Audit, Audit-Related, Tax and Other Services” Policy above will be applied. Any services outside the specific pre-approved service subcategories set forth above must be specifically approved by the Audit Committee.
o At least quarterly, the Audit Committee shall review a report summarizing the services by service category, including fees, provided by the Audit firm as set forth in the above policy.
(2) Disclose the percentage of services described in each of paragraphs (b) through (d) of this Item that were approved by the audit committee pursuant to paragraph (c)(7)(i)(C) of Rule 2-01 of Regulation S-X.
Beginning with non-audit service contracts entered into on or after May 6, 2003, the effective date of the new SEC pre-approval rules, the Trust’s audit committee is required to pre-approve services to affiliates defined by SEC rules to the extent that the services are determined to have a direct impact on the operations or financial reporting of the Trust. For the years ended March 31 2019 and 2020, there were no services provided to an affiliate that required the Trust’s audit committee pre-approval.
(f) If greater than 50 percent, disclose the percentage of hours expended on the principal accountants engagement to audit the registrant’s financial statements for the most recent fiscal year that were attributed to work performed by persons other than the principal accountant’s full-time, permanent employees.
N/A
(g) Disclose the aggregate non-audit fees billed by the registrants accountant for services rendered to the registrant, and rendered to the registrants investment adviser (not including any sub-adviser whose role is primarily portfolio management and is subcontracted with or overseen by another investment adviser), and any entity controlling, controlled by, or under common control with the adviser that provides ongoing services to the registrant for each of the last two fiscal years of the registrant.
The aggregate non-audit fees for the Trust were $9,739 payable to Ernst & Young LLP for the year ended March 31, 2020 and $9,739 for the year ended March 31, 2019.
(h) Disclose whether the registrants audit committee of the board of trustees has considered whether the provision of non-audit services that were rendered to the registrants investment adviser (not including any subadviser whose role is primarily portfolio management and is subcontracted with or overseen by another investment adviser), and any entity controlling, controlled by, or under common control with the investment adviser that provides ongoing services to the registrant that were not pre-approved pursuant to paragraph (c)(7)(ii) of Rule 2-01 of Regulation S-X is compatible with maintaining the principal accountant’s independence.
The Fund’s audit committee of the Board of Trustees has considered whether the provision of non-audit services that were rendered to the Affiliates (as defined) that were not pre- approved pursuant to paragraph (c)(7)(ii) of Rule 2-01 of Regulation S-X is compatible with maintaining the principal accountant’s independence.
ITEM 5. AUDIT COMMITTEE OF LISTED REGISTRANTS
(a) If the registrant is a listed issuer as defined in Rule 10A-3 under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.10A-3), state whether or not the registrant has a separately-designated standing audit committee established in accordance with Section 3(a)(58)(A) of the Exchange Act (15 U.S.C. 78c(a)(58)(A)). If the registrant has such a committee, however designated, identify each committee member. If the entire board of directors is acting as the registrant’s audit committee as specified in Section 3(a)(58)(B) of the Exchange Act (15 U.S.C. 78c(a)(58)(B)), so state.
N/A
(b) If applicable, provide the disclosure required by Rule 10A-3(d) under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.10A-3(d)) regarding an exemption from the listing standards for audit committees.
N/A
ITEM 6. SCHEDULE OF INVESTMENTS.
File Schedule of Investments in securities of unaffiliated issuers as of the close of the reporting period as set forth in 210.1212 of Regulation S-X [17 CFR 210.12-12], unless the schedule is included as part of the report to shareholders filed under Item 1 of this Form.
Included in Item 1
ITEM 7. DISCLOSURE OF PROXY VOTING POLICIES AND PROCEDURES FOR CLOSED-END MANAGEMENT INVESTMENT COMPANIES.
A closed-end management investment company that is filing an annual report on this Form N-CSR must, unless it invests exclusively in non-voting securities, describe the policies and procedures that it uses to determine how to vote proxies relating to portfolio securities, including the procedures that the company uses when a vote presents a conflict between the interests of its shareholders, on the one hand, and those of the company’s investment adviser; principal underwriter; or any affiliated person (as defined in Section 2(a)(3) of the Investment Company Act of 1940 (15 U.S.C. 80a-2(a)(3)) and the rules thereunder) of the company, its investment adviser, or its principal underwriter, on the other. Include any policies and procedures of the company’s investment adviser, or any other third party, that the company uses, or that are used on the company’s behalf, to determine how to vote proxies relating to portfolio securities.
Proxy Voting Policies and Procedures of
Pioneer Investment Management, Inc.
VERSION DATED July, 2004
Overview
Pioneer Investment Management, Inc. (“Pioneer”) is a fiduciary that owes
each of its client’s duties of care and loyalty with respect to all
services undertaken on the client’s behalf, including proxy voting. When
Pioneer has been delegated proxy-voting authority for a client, the duty of
care requires Pioneer to monitor corporate events and to vote the proxies.
To satisfy its duty of loyalty, Pioneer must place its client’s interests
ahead of its own and must cast proxy votes in a manner consistent with the
best interest of its clients. Pioneer will vote all proxies presented in a
timely manner.
The Proxy Voting Policies and Procedures are designed to complement
Pioneer’s investment policies and procedures regarding its general
responsibility to monitor the performance and/or corporate events of
companies that are issuers of securities held in accounts managed by
Pioneer. Pioneer’s Proxy Voting Policies summarize Pioneer’s position on a
number of issues solicited by companies held by Pioneer’s clients. The
policies are guidelines that provide a general indication on how Pioneer
would vote but do not include all potential voting scenarios.
Pioneer’s Proxy Voting Procedures detail monitoring of voting, exception
votes, and review of conflicts of interest and ensure that case-by-case
votes are handled within the context of the overall guidelines (i.e. best
interest of client). The overriding goal is that all proxies for US and
non-US companies that are received promptly will be voted in accordance
with Pioneer’s policies or specific client instructions. All shares in a
company held by Pioneer-managed accounts will be voted alike, unless a
client has given us specific voting instructions on an issue or has not
delegated authority to us or the Proxy Voting Oversight Group determines
that the circumstances justify a different approach.
Pioneer does not delegate the authority to vote proxies relating to its
clients to any of its affiliates, which include other subsidiaries of
UniCredito.
Any questions about these policies and procedures should be directed to the
Proxy Coordinator.
1
Proxy Voting Procedures
Proxy Voting Service
Pioneer has engaged an independent proxy voting service to assist in the
voting of proxies. The proxy voting service works with custodians to ensure
that all proxy materials are received by the custodians and are processed
in a timely fashion. To the extent applicable, the proxy voting service
votes all proxies in accordance with the proxy voting policies established
by Pioneer. The proxy voting service will refer proxy questions to the
Proxy Coordinator (described below) for instructions under circumstances
where: (1) the application of the proxy voting guidelines is unclear; (2) a
particular proxy question is not covered by the guidelines; or (3) the
guidelines call for specific instructions on a case-by-case basis. The
proxy voting service is also requested to call to the Proxy Coordinator’s
attention specific proxy questions that, while governed by a guideline,
appear to involve unusual or controversial issues. Pioneer reserves the
right to attend a meeting in person and may do so when it determines that
the company or the matters to be voted on at the meeting are strategically
important to its clients.
Proxy Coordinator
Pioneer’s Director of Investment Operations (the “Proxy Coordinator”)
coordinates the voting, procedures and reporting of proxies on behalf of
Pioneer’s clients. The Proxy Coordinator will deal directly with the proxy
voting service and, in the case of proxy questions referred by the proxy
voting service, will solicit voting recommendations and instructions from
the Director of Portfolio Management US or, to the extent applicable,
investment sub-advisers. The Proxy Coordinator is responsible for ensuring
that these questions and referrals are responded to in a timely fashion and
for transmitting appropriate voting instructions to the proxy voting
service. The Proxy Coordinator is responsible for verifying with the
Compliance Department whether Pioneer’s voting power is subject to any
limitations or guidelines issued by the client (or in the case of an
employee benefit plan, the plan’s trustee or other fiduciaries).
Referral Items
From time to time, the proxy voting service will refer proxy questions to
the Proxy Coordinator that are described by Pioneer’s policy as to be voted
on a case-by-case basis, that are not covered by Pioneer’s guidelines or
where Pioneer’s guidelines may be unclear with respect to the matter to be
voted on. Under such certain circumstances, the Proxy Coordinator will seek
a written voting recommendation from the Director of Portfolio Management
US. Any such recommendation will include: (i) the manner in which the
proxies should be voted; (ii) the rationale underlying any such decision;
and (iii) the disclosure of any contacts or communications made between
Pioneer and any outside parties concerning the proxy proposal prior to the
time that the voting instructions are provided. In addition, the Proxy
Coordinator will ask the Compliance Department to review the question for
any actual or apparent conflicts of interest as described below under
“Conflicts of
2
Interest.” The Compliance Department will provide a “Conflicts of Interest
Report,” applying the criteria set forth below under “Conflicts of
Interest,” to the Proxy Coordinator summarizing the results of its review.
In the absence of a conflict of interest, the Proxy Coordinator will vote
in accordance with the recommendation of the Director of Portfolio
Management US.
If the matter presents a conflict of interest for Pioneer, then the Proxy
Coordinator will refer the matter to the Proxy Voting Oversight Group for a
decision. In general, when a conflict of interest is present, Pioneer will
vote according to the recommendation of the Director of Portfolio
Management US where such recommendation would go against Pioneer’s interest
or where the conflict is deemed to be immaterial. Pioneer will vote
according to the recommendation of its proxy voting service when the
conflict is deemed to be material and the Pioneer’s internal vote
recommendation would favor Pioneer’s interest, unless a client specifically
requests Pioneer to do otherwise. When making the final determination as to
how to vote a proxy, the Proxy Voting Oversight Group will review the
report from the Director of Portfolio Management US and the Conflicts of
Interest Report issued by the Compliance Department.
Conflicts of Interest
A conflict of interest occurs when Pioneer’s interests interfere, or appear
to interfere with the interests of Pioneer’s clients. Occasionally, Pioneer
may have a conflict that can affect how its votes proxies. The conflict may
be actual or perceived and may exist when the matter to be voted on
concerns:
o An affiliate of Pioneer, such as another company belonging to
the UniCredito Italiano S.p.A. banking group (a “UniCredito
Affiliate”);
o An issuer of a security for which Pioneer acts as a sponsor,
advisor, manager, custodian, distributor, underwriter, broker, or
other similar capacity (including those securities specifically
declared by PGAM to present a conflict of interest for Pioneer);
o An issuer of a security for which UniCredito has informed Pioneer
that a UniCredito Affiliate acts as a sponsor, advisor, manager,
custodian, distributor, underwriter, broker, or other similar
capacity; or
o A person with whom Pioneer (or any of its affiliates) has an
existing, material contract or business relationship that was not
entered into in the ordinary course of Pioneer’s business.
o Pioneer will abstain from voting with respect to companies
directly or indirectly owned by UniCredito Italiano Group, unless
otherwise directed by a client. In addition, Pioneer will inform
PGAM Global Compliance and the PGAM Independent Directors before
exercising such rights.
Any associate involved in the proxy voting process with knowledge of any
apparent or actual conflict of interest must disclose such conflict to the
Proxy Coordinator and the Compliance Department. The Compliance Department
will review each item referred to Pioneer to determine whether an actual or
potential conflict of interest with Pioneer exists in connection with the
proposal(s) to be voted upon. The review will be conducted by comparing the
apparent parties affected by the proxy proposal being
3
voted upon against the Compliance Department’s internal list of interested
persons and, for any matches found, evaluating the anticipated magnitude
and possible probability of any conflict of interest being present. For
each referral item, the determination regarding the presence or absence of
any actual or potential conflict of interest will be documented in a
Conflicts of Interest Report to the Proxy Coordinator.
Securities Lending
In conjunction with industry standards Proxies are not available to be
voted when the shares are out on loan through either Pioneer’s lending
program or a client’s managed security lending program. However, Pioneer
will reserve the right to recall lent securities so that they may be voted
according to the Pioneer’s instructions. If a portfolio manager would like
to vote a block of previously lent shares, the Proxy Coordinator will work
with the portfolio manager and Investment Operations to recall the
security, to the extent possible, to facilitate the vote on the entire
block of shares.
Share-Blocking
“Share-blocking” is a market practice whereby shares are sent to a
custodian (which may be different than the account custodian) for record
keeping and voting at the general meeting. The shares are unavailable for
sale or delivery until the end of the blocking period (typically the day
after general meeting date).
Pioneer will vote in those countries with “share-blocking.” In the event a
manager would like to sell a security with “share-blocking”, the Proxy
Coordinator will work with the Portfolio Manager and Investment Operations
Department to recall the shares (as allowable within the market time-frame
and practices) and/or communicate with executing brokerage firm. A list of
countries with “share-blocking” is available from the Investment Operations
Department upon request.
Record Keeping
The Proxy Coordinator shall ensure that Pioneer’s proxy voting service:
o Retains a copy of the proxy statement received (unless the proxy
statement is available from the SEC’s Electronic Data Gathering,
Analysis, and Retrieval (EDGAR) system);
o Retains a record of the vote cast;
o Prepares Form N-PX for filing on behalf of each client that is a
registered investment company; and
o Is able to promptly provide Pioneer with a copy of the voting
record upon its request.
4
The Proxy Coordinator shall ensure that for those votes that may require
additional documentation (i.e. conflicts of interest, exception votes and
case-by-case votes) the following records are maintained:
o A record memorializing the basis for each referral vote cast;
o A copy of any document created by Pioneer that was material in
making the decision on how to vote the subject proxy; and
o A copy of any conflict notice, conflict consent or any other
written communication (including emails or other electronic
communications) to or from the client (or in the case of an
employee benefit plan, the plan’s trustee or other fiduciaries)
regarding the subject proxy vote cast by, or the vote
recommendation of, Pioneer.
o Pioneer shall maintain the above records in the client’s file for a
period not less than ten (10) years.
Disclosure
Pioneer shall take reasonable measures to inform its clients of the process
or procedures clients must follow to obtain information regarding how
Pioneer voted with respect to assets held in their accounts. In addition,
Pioneer shall describe to clients its proxy voting policies and procedures
and will furnish a copy of its proxy voting policies and procedures upon
request. This information may be provided to clients through Pioneer’s Form
ADV (Part II) disclosure, by separate notice to the client, or through
Pioneer’s website.
Proxy Voting Oversight Group
The members of the Proxy Voting Oversight Group are Pioneer’s: Director of
Portfolio Management US, Head of Investment Operations, and Director of
Compliance. Other members of Pioneer will be invited to attend meetings and
otherwise participate as necessary. The Head of Investment Operations will
chair the Proxy Voting Oversight Group.
The Proxy Voting Oversight Group is responsible for developing, evaluating,
and changing (when necessary) Pioneer’s Proxy Voting Policies and
Procedures. The group meets at least annually to evaluate and review these
policies and procedures and the services of its third-party proxy voting
service. In addition, the Proxy Voting Oversight Group will meet as
necessary to vote on referral items and address other business as
necessary.
Amendments
Pioneer may not amend its Proxy Voting Policies And Procedures without the
prior approval of the Proxy Voting Oversight Group and its corporate
parent, Pioneer Global Asset Management S.p.A
5
Proxy Voting Policies
Pioneer’s sole concern in voting proxies is the economic effect of the
proposal on the value of portfolio holdings, considering both the short-
and long-term impact. In many instances, Pioneer believes that supporting
the company’s strategy and voting “for” management’s proposals builds
portfolio value. In other cases, however, proposals set forth by management
may have a negative effect on that value, while some shareholder proposals
may hold the best prospects for enhancing it. Pioneer monitors developments
in the proxy-voting arena and will revise this policy as needed.
All proxies that are received promptly will be voted in accordance with the
specific policies listed below. All shares in a company held by
Pioneer-managed accounts will be voted alike, unless a client has given us
specific voting instructions on an issue or has not delegated authority to
us. Proxy voting issues will be reviewed by Pioneer’s Proxy Voting
Oversight Group, which consists of the Director of Portfolio Management US,
the Director of Investment Operations (the Proxy Coordinator), and the
Director of Compliance.
Pioneer has established Proxy Voting Procedures for identifying and
reviewing conflicts of interest that may arise in the voting of proxies.
Clients may request, at any time, a report on proxy votes for securities
held in their portfolios and Pioneer is happy to discuss our proxy votes
with company management. Pioneer retains a proxy voting service to provide
research on proxy issues and to process proxy votes.
Administrative
While administrative items appear infrequently in U.S. issuer proxies, they
are quite common in non-U.S. proxies.
We will generally support these and similar management proposals:
o Corporate name change.
o A change of corporate headquarters.
o Stock exchange listing.
o Establishment of time and place of annual meeting.
o Adjournment or postponement of annual meeting.
o Acceptance/approval of financial statements.
o Approval of dividend payments, dividend reinvestment plans and other
dividend-related proposals.
o Approval of minutes and other formalities.
6
o Authorization of the transferring of reserves and allocation of
income.
o Amendments to authorized signatories.
o Approval of accounting method changes or change in fiscal year-end.
o Acceptance of labor agreements.
o Appointment of internal auditors.
Pioneer will vote on a case-by-case basis on other routine business;
however, Pioneer will oppose any routine business proposal if insufficient
information is presented in advance to allow Pioneer to judge the merit of
the proposal. Pioneer has also instructed its proxy voting service to
inform Pioneer of its analysis of any administrative items inconsistent, in
its view, with supporting the value of Pioneer portfolio holdings so that
Pioneer may consider and vote on those items on a case-by-case basis.
Auditors
We normally vote for proposals to:
o Ratify the auditors. We will consider a vote against if we are
concerned about the auditors’ independence or their past work for
the company. Specifically, we will oppose the ratification of
auditors and withhold votes from audit committee members if
non-audit fees paid by the company to the auditing firm exceed the
sum of audit fees plus audit-related fees plus permissible tax
fees according to the disclosure categories proposed by the
Securities and Exchange Commission.
o Restore shareholder rights to ratify the auditors.
We will normally oppose proposals that require companies to:
o Seek bids from other auditors.
o Rotate auditing firms, except where the rotation is statutorily
required or where rotation would demonstrably strengthen financial
disclosure.
o Indemnify auditors.
o Prohibit auditors from engaging in non-audit services for the
company.
Board of Directors
On issues related to the board of directors, Pioneer normally supports
management. We will, however, consider a vote against management in
instances where corporate performance has been very poor or where the board
appears to lack independence.
7
General Board Issues
Pioneer will vote for:
o Audit, compensation and nominating committees composed of
independent directors exclusively.
o Indemnification for directors for actions taken in good faith in
accordance with the business judgment rule. We will vote against
proposals for broader indemnification.
o Changes in board size that appear to have a legitimate business
purpose and are not primarily for anti-takeover reasons.
o Election of an honorary director.
We will vote against:
o Minimum stock ownership by directors.
o Term limits for directors. Companies benefit from experienced
directors, and shareholder control is better achieved through
annual votes.
o Requirements for union or special interest representation on the
board.
o Requirements to provide two candidates for each board seat.
We will vote on a case-by case basis on these issues:
o Separate chairman and CEO positions. We will consider voting with
shareholders on these issues in cases of poor corporate
performance.
Elections of Directors
In uncontested elections of directors we will vote against:
o Individual directors with absenteeism above 25% without valid
reason. We support proposals that require disclosure of director
attendance.
o Insider directors and affiliated outsiders who sit on the audit,
compensation, stock option or nominating committees. For the
purposes of our policy, we accept the definition of affiliated
directors provided by our proxy voting service.
We will also vote against:
o Directors who have failed to act on a takeover offer where the
majority of shareholders have tendered their shares.
o Directors who appear to lack independence or are associated with
very poor corporate performance.
8
We will vote on a case-by case basis on these issues:
o Re-election of directors who have implemented or renewed a
dead-hand or modified dead-hand poison pill (a “dead-hand poison
pill” is a shareholder rights plan that may be altered only by
incumbent or “dead ” directors. These plans prevent a potential
acquirer from disabling a poison pill by obtaining control of the
board through a proxy vote).
�� o Contested election of directors.
o Prior to phase-in required by SEC, we would consider supporting
election of a majority of independent directors in cases of poor
performance.
o Mandatory retirement policies.
o Directors who have ignored a shareholder proposal that has been
approved by shareholders for two consecutive years.
Takeover-Related Measures
Pioneer is generally opposed to proposals that may discourage takeover
attempts. We believe that the potential for a takeover helps ensure that
corporate performance remains high.
Pioneer will vote for:
o Cumulative voting.
o Increase ability for shareholders to call special meetings.
o Increase ability for shareholders to act by written consent.
o Restrictions on the ability to make greenmail payments.
o Submitting rights plans to shareholder vote.
o Rescinding shareholder rights plans (“poison pills”).
o Opting out of the following state takeover statutes:
o Control share acquisition statutes, which deny large holders voting
rights on holdings over a specified threshold.
o Control share cash-out provisions, which require large holders to
acquire shares from other holders.
o Freeze-out provisions, which impose a waiting period on large
holders before they can attempt to gain control.
o Stakeholder laws, which permit directors to consider interests of
non-shareholder constituencies.
9
o Disgorgement provisions, which require acquirers to disgorge profits
on purchases made before gaining control.
o Fair price provisions.
o Authorization of shareholder rights plans.
o Labor protection provisions.
o Mandatory classified boards.
We will vote on a case-by-case basis on the following issues:
o Fair price provisions. We will vote against provisions requiring
supermajority votes to approve takeovers. We will also consider
voting against proposals that require a supermajority vote to
repeal or amend the provision. Finally, we will consider the
mechanism used to determine the fair price; we are generally
opposed to complicated formulas or requirements to pay a premium.
o Opting out of state takeover statutes regarding fair price
provisions. We will use the criteria used for fair price
provisions in general to determine our vote on this issue.
o Proposals that allow shareholders to nominate directors.
We will vote against:
o Classified boards, except in the case of closed-end mutual funds.
o Limiting shareholder ability to remove or appoint directors. We
will support proposals to restore shareholder authority in this
area. We will review on a case-by-case basis proposals that
authorize the board to make interim appointments.
o Classes of shares with unequal voting rights.
o Supermajority vote requirements.
o Severance packages (“golden” and “tin” parachutes). We will support
proposals to put these packages to shareholder vote.
o Reimbursement of dissident proxy solicitation expenses. While we
ordinarily support measures that encourage takeover bids, we
believe that management should have full control over corporate
funds.
o Extension of advance notice requirements for shareholder proposals.
o Granting board authority normally retained by shareholders (e.g.,
amend charter, set board size).
o Shareholder rights plans (“poison pills”). These plans generally
allow shareholders to buy additional shares at a below-market
price in the event of a change in control and may deter some bids.
10
Capital Structure
Managements need considerable flexibility in determining the company’s
financial structure, and Pioneer normally supports managements’ proposals
in this area. We will, however, reject proposals that impose high barriers
to potential takeovers.
Pioneer will vote for:
o Changes in par value.
o Reverse splits, if accompanied by a reduction in number of shares.
o Share repurchase programs, if all shareholders may participate on
equal terms.
o Bond issuance.
o Increases in “ordinary” preferred stock.
o Proposals to have blank-check common stock placements (other than
shares issued in the normal course of business) submitted for
shareholder approval.
o Cancellation of company treasury shares.
We will vote on a case-by-case basis on the following issues:
o Reverse splits not accompanied by a reduction in number of shares,
considering the risk of delisting.
o Increase in authorized common stock. We will make a determination
considering, among other factors:
o Number of shares currently available for issuance;
o Size of requested increase (we would normally approve increases of up to
100% of current authorization);
o Proposed use of the additional shares; and
o Potential consequences of a failure to increase the number of shares
outstanding (e.g., delisting or bankruptcy).
o Blank-check preferred. We will normally oppose issuance of a new
class of blank-check preferred, but may approve an increase in a
class already outstanding if the company has demonstrated that it
uses this flexibility appropriately.
o Proposals to submit private placements to shareholder vote.
o Other financing plans.
We will vote against preemptive rights that we believe limit a company’s
financing flexibility.
11
Compensation
Pioneer supports compensation plans that link pay to shareholder returns
and believes that management has the best understanding of the level of
compensation needed to attract and retain qualified people. At the same
time, stock-related compensation plans have a significant economic impact
and a direct effect on the balance sheet. Therefore, while we do not want
to micromanage a company’s compensation programs, we will place limits on
the potential dilution these plans may impose.
Pioneer will vote for:
o 401(k) benefit plans.
o Employee stock ownership plans (ESOPs), as long as shares
allocated to ESOPs are less than 5% of outstanding shares. Larger
blocks of stock in ESOPs can serve as a takeover defense. We will
support proposals to submit ESOPs to shareholder vote.
o Various issues related to the Omnibus Budget and Reconciliation Act
of 1993 (OBRA), including:
o Amendments to performance plans to conform with OBRA;
o Caps on annual grants or amendments of administrative features;
o Adding performance goals; and
o Cash or cash-and-stock bonus plans.
o Establish a process to link pay, including stock-option grants, to
performance, leaving specifics of implementation to the company.
o Require that option repricings be submitted to shareholders.
o Require the expensing of stock-option awards.
o Require reporting of executive retirement benefits (deferred
compensation, split-dollar life insurance, SERPs, and pension
benefits).
o Employee stock purchase plans where the purchase price is equal to
at least 85% of the market price, where the offering period is no
greater than 27 months and where potential dilution (as defined
below) is no greater than 10%.
12
We will vote on a case-by-case basis on the following issues:
o Executive and director stock-related compensation plans. We will
consider the following factors when reviewing these plans:
o The program must be of a reasonable size. We will approve plans
where the combined employee and director plans together would
generate less than 15% dilution. We will reject plans with 15% or
more potential dilution.
Dilution = (A + B + C) / (A + B + C + D), where
A = Shares reserved for plan/amendment,
B = Shares available under continuing plans,
C = Shares granted but unexercised and
D = Shares outstanding.
o The plan must not:
o Explicitly permit unlimited option repricing authority or that
have repriced in the past without shareholder approval.
o Be a self-replenishing “evergreen” plan, plans that grant
discount options and tax offset payments.
o We are generally in favor of proposals that increase participation beyond
executives.
o We generally support proposals asking companies to adopt rigorous
vesting provisions for stock option plans such as those that vest
incrementally over, at least, a three- or four-year period with a pro
rata portion of the shares becoming exercisable on an annual basis
following grant date.
o We generally support proposals asking companies to disclose their
window period policies for stock transactions. Window period policies
ensure that employees do not exercise options based on insider
information contemporaneous with quarterly earnings releases and other
material corporate announcements.
o We generally support proposals asking companies to adopt stock holding
periods for their executives.
o All other employee stock purchase plans.
o All other compensation-related proposals, including deferred
compensation plans, employment agreements, loan guarantee programs
and retirement plans.
o All other proposals regarding stock compensation plans, including
extending the life of a plan, changing vesting restrictions,
repricing options, lengthening exercise periods or accelerating
distribution of awards and pyramiding and cashless exercise
programs.
13
We will vote against:
o Pensions for non-employee directors. We believe these retirement
plans reduce director objectivity.
o Elimination of stock option plans.
We will vote on a case-by case basis on these issues:
o Limits on executive and director pay.
o Stock in lieu of cash compensation for directors.
Corporate Governance
Pioneer will vote for:
o Confidential Voting.
o Equal access provisions, which allow shareholders to contribute
their opinion to proxy materials.
o Proposals requiring directors to disclose their ownership of shares
in the company.
We will vote on a case-by-case basis on the following issues:
o Change in the state of incorporation. We will support
reincorporations supported by valid business reasons. We will
oppose those that appear to be solely for the purpose of
strengthening takeover defenses.
o Bundled proposals. We will evaluate the overall impact of the
proposal.
o Adopting or amending the charter, bylaws or articles of association.
o Shareholder appraisal rights, which allow shareholders to demand
judicial review of an acquisition price.
We will vote against:
o Shareholder advisory committees. While management should solicit
shareholder input, we prefer to leave the method of doing so to
management’s discretion.
o Limitations on stock ownership or voting rights.
o Reduction in share ownership disclosure guidelines.
14
Mergers and Restructurings
Pioneer will vote on the following and similar issues on a case-by-case
basis:
o Mergers and acquisitions.
o Corporate restructurings, including spin-offs, liquidations, asset
sales, joint ventures, conversions to holding company and
conversions to self-managed REIT structure.
o Debt restructurings.
o Conversion of securities.
o Issuance of shares to facilitate a merger.
o Private placements, warrants, convertible debentures.
o Proposals requiring management to inform shareholders of merger
opportunities.
We will normally vote against shareholder proposals requiring that the
company be put up for sale.
Mutual Funds
Many of our portfolios may invest in shares of closed-end mutual funds or
exchange-traded funds. The non-corporate structure of these investments
raises several unique proxy voting issues.
Pioneer will vote for:
o Establishment of new classes or series of shares.
o Establishment of a master-feeder structure.
Pioneer will vote on a case-by-case on:
o Changes in investment policy. We will normally support changes
that do not affect the investment objective or overall risk level
of the fund. We will examine more fundamental changes on a
case-by-case basis.
o Approval of new or amended advisory contracts.
o Changes from closed-end to open-end format.
o Authorization for, or increase in, preferred shares.
o Disposition of assets, termination, liquidation, or mergers.
o Classified boards of closed-end mutual funds, but will typically
support such proposals.
15
Social Issues
Pioneer will abstain on stockholder proposals calling for greater
disclosure of corporate activities with regard to social issues. “Social
Issues” may generally be described as shareholder proposals for a company
to:
o Conduct studies regarding certain issues of public concern and
interest;
o Study the feasibility of the company taking certain actions with
regard to such issues; or
o Take specific action, including ceasing certain behavior and
adopting company standards and principles, in relation to issues
of public concern and interest.
We believe these issues are important and should receive management
attention.
Pioneer will vote against proposals calling for substantial changes in the
company’s business or activities. We will also normally vote against
proposals with regard to contributions, believing that management should
control the routine disbursement of funds.
ITEM 8. PORTFOLIO MANAGERS OF CLOSED-END MANAGEMENT INVESTMENT COMPANIES.
(a) If the registrant is a closed-end management investment company that is filing an annual report on this Form N-CSR,provide the following information:
(1) State the name, title, and length of service of the person or persons employed by or associated with the registrant or an investment adviser of the registrant who are primarily responsible for the day-to-day management of the registrant’s portfolio (“Portfolio Manager”). Also state each Portfolio Manager’s business experience during the past 5 years.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ABOUT THE PORTFOLIO MANAGER
OTHER ACCOUNTS MANAGED BY THE PORTFOLIO MANAGER
The table below indicates, for the portfolio manager of the fund, information
about the accounts other than the fund over which the portfolio manager has
day-to-day investment responsibility. All information on the number of accounts
and total assets in the table is as of March 31, 2020. For purposes of the
table, “Other Pooled Investment Vehicles” may include investment partnerships,
undertakings for collective investments in transferable securities (“UCITS”)
and other non-U.S. investment funds and group trusts, and “Other Accounts” may
include separate accounts for institutions or individuals, insurance company
general or separate accounts, pension funds and other similar institutional
accounts but generally do not include the portfolio manager’s personal
investment accounts or those which the manager may be deemed to own
beneficially under the code of ethics. Certain funds and other accounts managed
by the portfolio manager may have substantially similar investment strategies.
NUMBER OF ASSETS
ACCOUNTS MANAGED
MANAGED FOR FOR WHICH
WHICH ADVISORY ADVISORY
NUMBER OF FEE IS FEE IS
NAME OF ACCOUNTS TOTAL ASSETS PERFORMANCE- PERFORMANCE-
PORTFOLIO MANAGER TYPE OF ACCOUNT MANAGED MANAGED (000’S) BASED BASED (000’S)
Andrew Feltus Other Registered Investment Companies 8 $5,039,401 N/A N/A
Other Pooled Investment Vehicles 14 $8,063,970 N/A N/A
Other Accounts 7 $1,532,927 N/A N/A
Matthew Shulkin Other Registered
Investment Companies 4 $ 856,204 N/A N/A
Other Pooled Investment Vehicles 9 $3,976,216 N/A N/A
Other Accounts 5 $ 638,320 N/A N/A
Kenneth Monaghan Other Registered Investment
Companies 7 $1,325,444 N/A N/A
Other Pooled Investment Vehicles 14 $4,591,022 N/A N/A
Other Accounts 4 $ 373,420 N/A N/A
POTENTIAL CONFLICTS OF INTEREST
When a portfolio manager is responsible for the management of more than one
account, the potential arises for the portfolio manager to favor one account
over another. The principal types of potential conflicts of interest that may
arise are discussed below. For the reasons outlined below, Amundi Pioneer does
not believe that any material conflicts are likely to arise out of a portfolio
manager’s responsibility for the management of the fund as well as one or more
other accounts. Although Amundi Pioneer has adopted procedures that it believes
are reasonably designed to detect and prevent violations of the federal
securities laws and to mitigate the potential for conflicts of interest to
affect its portfolio management decisions, there can be no assurance that all
conflicts will be identified or that all procedures will be effective in
mitigating the potential for such risks. Generally, the risks of such conflicts
of interest are increased to the extent that a portfolio manager has a
financial incentive to favor one account over another. Amundi Pioneer has
structured its compensation arrangements in a manner that is intended to limit
such potential for conflicts of interest. See “Compensation of Portfolio
Managers” below.
o A portfolio manager could favor one account over another in allocating new
investment opportunities that have limited supply, such as initial public
offerings and private placements. If, for example, an initial
public offering that was expected to appreciate in value significantly shortly
after the offering was allocated to a single account, that account may be
expected to have better investment performance than other accounts that did
not receive an allocation of the initial public offering. Generally,
investments for which there is limited availability are allocated based upon a
range of factors including available cash and consistency with the accounts’
investment objectives and policies. This allocation methodology necessarily
involves some subjective elements but is intended over time to treat each
client in an equitable and fair manner. Generally, the investment opportunity
is allocated among participating accounts on a pro rata basis. Although Amundi
Pioneer believes that its practices are reasonably designed to treat each
client in an equitable and fair manner, there may be instances where a fund
may not participate, or may participate to a lesser degree than other clients,
in the allocation of an investment opportunity.
o A portfolio manager could favor one account over another in the order in
which trades for the accounts are placed. If a portfolio manager determines
to purchase a security for more than one account in an aggregate amount that
may influence the market price of the security, accounts that purchased or
sold the security first may receive a more favorable price than accounts
that made subsequent transactions. The less liquid the market for the
security or the greater the percentage that the proposed aggregate purchases
or sales represent of average daily trading volume, the greater the
potential for accounts that make subsequent purchases or sales to receive a
less favorable price. When a portfolio manager intends to trade the same
security on the same day for more than one account, the trades typically are
“bunched,” which means that the trades for the individual accounts are
aggregated and each account receives the same price. There are some types of
accounts as to which bunching may not be possible for contractual reasons
(such as directed brokerage arrangements). Circumstances may also arise
where the trader believes that bunching the orders may not result in the
best possible price. Where those accounts or circumstances are involved,
Amundi Pioneer will place the order in a manner intended to result in as
favorable a price as possible for such client.
o A portfolio manager could favor an account if the portfolio manager’s
compensation is tied to the performance of that account to a greater degree
than other accounts managed by the portfolio manager. If, for example, the
portfolio manager receives a bonus based upon the performance of certain
accounts relative to a benchmark while other accounts are disregarded for
this purpose, the portfolio manager will have a financial incentive to seek
to have the accounts that determine the portfolio manager’s bonus achieve
the best possible performance to the possible detriment of other accounts.
Similarly, if Amundi Pioneer receives a performance-based advisory fee, the
portfolio manager may favor that account, whether or not the performance of
that account directly determines the portfolio manager’s compensation.
o A portfolio manager could favor an account if the portfolio manager has a
beneficial interest in the account, in order to benefit a large client or to
compensate a client that had poor returns. For example, if the portfolio
manager held an interest in an investment partnership that was one of the
accounts managed by the portfolio manager, the portfolio manager would have
an economic incentive to favor the account in which the portfolio manager
held an interest.
o If the different accounts have materially and potentially conflicting
investment objectives or strategies, a conflict of interest could arise. For
example, if a portfolio manager purchases a security for one account and
sells the same security for another account, such trading pattern may
disadvantage either the account that is long or short. In making portfolio
manager assignments, Amundi Pioneer seeks to avoid such potentially
conflicting situations. However, where a portfolio manager is responsible
for accounts with differing investment objectives and policies, it is
possible that the portfolio manager will conclude that it is in the best
interest of one account to sell a portfolio security while another account
continues to hold or increase the holding in such security.
COMPENSATION OF PORTFOLIO MANAGER
Amundi Pioneer has adopted a system of compensation for portfolio managers that
seeks to align the financial interests of the portfolio managers with those of
shareholders of the accounts (including Pioneer funds) the portfolio managers
manage, as well as with the financial performance of Amundi Pioneer. The
compensation program for all Amundi Pioneer portfolio managers includes a base
salary (determined by the rank and tenure of the employee) and an annual bonus
program, as well as customary benefits that are offered generally to all
full-time employees. Base compensation is fixed and normally reevaluated on an
annual basis. Amundi Pioneer seeks to set base compensation at market rates,
taking into account the experience and responsibilities of the portfolio
manager. The bonus plan is intended to provide a competitive level of annual
bonus compensation that is tied to the portfolio manager achieving superior
investment performance and align the interests of the investment professional
with those of shareholders, as well as with the financial performance of Amundi
Pioneer. Any bonus under the plan is completely discretionary, with a maximum
annual bonus that may be in excess of base salary. The annual bonus is based
upon a combination of the following factors:
o QUANTITATIVE INVESTMENT PERFORMANCE. The quantitative investment performance
calculation is based on pre-tax investment performance of all of the
accounts managed by the portfolio manager (which includes the fund and any
other accounts managed by the portfolio manager) over a one-year period (20%
weighting) and four-year period (80% weighting), measured for periods ending
on December 31. The accounts, which include the fund, are ranked against a
group of mutual funds with similar investment objectives and investment
focus (60%) and a broad-based securities market index measuring the
performance of the same type of securities in which the accounts invest
(40%), which, in the case of the fund, is the Bank of America Merrill Lynch
High Yield Master II Index. As a result of these two benchmarks, the
performance of the portfolio manager for compensation purposes is measured
against the criteria that are relevant to the portfolio manager’s
competitive universe.
o QUALITATIVE PERFORMANCE. The qualitative performance component with respect
to all of the accounts managed by the portfolio manager includes objectives,
such as effectiveness in the areas of teamwork, leadership, communications
and marketing, that are mutually established and evaluated by each portfolio
manager and management.
o AMUNDI PIONEER RESULTS AND BUSINESS LINE RESULTS. Amundi Pioneer’s financial
performance, as well as the investment performance of its investment
management group, affect a portfolio manager’s actual bonus by a leverage
factor of plus or minus (+/-) a predetermined percentage.
The quantitative and qualitative performance components comprise 80% and 20%,
respectively, of the overall bonus calculation (on a pre-adjustment basis). A
portion of the annual bonus is deferred for a specified period and may be
invested in one or more Pioneer funds.
Certain portfolio managers participate in other programs designed to reward and
retain key contributors. Portfolio managers also may participate in a deferred
compensation program, whereby deferred amounts are invested in one or more
Pioneer funds or collective investment trusts or other unregistered funds with
similar investment objectives, strategies and policies.
SHARE OWNERSHIP BY PORTFOLIO MANAGERS
The following table indicates as of March 31, 2020 the value, within the
indicated range, of shares beneficially owned by the portfolio managers of the
fund.
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
BENEFICIAL OWNERSHIP
NAME OF PORTFOLIO MANAGER OF THE FUND*
Andrew Feltus C
Matthew Shulkin A
Kenneth Monaghan A
* Key to Dollar Ranges
A. None
B. $1 - $10,000
C. $10,001 - $50,000
D. $50,001 - $100,000
E. $100,001 - $500,000
F. $500,001 - $1,000,000
G. Over $1,000,000
ITEM 9. PURCHASES OF EQUITY SECURITIES BY CLOSED-END MANAGEMENT INVESTMENT COMPANY AND AFFILIATED PURCHASERS.
(a) If the registrant is a closed-end management investment company, in the following tabular format, provide the information specified in paragraph (b) of this Item with respect to any purchase made by or on behalf of the registrant or any affiliated purchaser, as defined in Rule 10b-18(a)(3) under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.10b-18(a)(3)), of shares or other units of any class of the registrant’s equity securities that is registered by the registrant pursuant to Section 12 of the Exchange Act (15 U.S.C. 781).
During the period covered by this report, there were no purchases made by or on behalf of the registrant or any affiliated purchaser as defined in Rule 10b-18(a)(3) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the Exchange Act), of shares of the registrants equity securities that are registered by the registrant pursuant to Section 12 of the Exchange Act.
ITEM 10. SUBMISSION OF MATTERS TO A VOTE OF SECURITY HOLDERS.
Describe any material changes to the procedures by which shareholders may recommend nominees to the registrant’s board of directors, where those changes were implemented after the registrant last provided disclosure in response to the requirements of Item 407(c)(2)(iv) of Regulation S-R(17 CFR 229.407)(as required by Item 22(b)(15)) of Schedule 14A (17 CFR 240.14a-101), or this Item.
There have been no material changes to the procedures by which the shareholders may recommend nominees to the registrant’s board of directors since the registrant last provided disclosure in response to the requirements of Item 407(c)(2)(iv) of Regulation S-R of Schedule 14(A) in its definitive proxy statement, or this item.
ITEM 11. CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES.
(a) Disclose the conclusions of the registrant’s principal executive and principal financials officers, or persons performing similar functions, regarding the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Rule 30a-3(c) under the Act (17 CFR 270.30a-3(c))) as of a date within 90 days of the filing date of the report that includes the disclosure required by this paragraph, based on the evaluation of these controls and procedures required by Rule 30a-3(b) under the Act (17 CFR 270.30(a)-3(b) and Rules 13a-15(b) or 15d-15(b) under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.13a-15(b) or 240.15d-15(b)).
The registrant’s principal executive officer and principal financial officer have concluded that the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures are effective based on the evaluation of these controls and procedures as of a date within 90 days of the filing date of this report.
(b) Disclose any change in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Rule 30a-3(d) under the Act (17CFR 270.30a-3(d)) that occured during the second fiscal quarter of the period covered by this report that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.
There were no significant changes in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the second fiscal quarter of the period covered by this report that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.
Item 12. Disclosure of Securities Lending Activities for Closed-End Management Investment Companies.
(a) If the registrant is a closed-end management investment company, provide the following dollar amounts of income and compensation related to the securities lending activities of the registrant during its most recent fiscal year:
N/A
(1) Gross income from securities lending activities;
N/A
(2) All fees and/or compensation for each of the following securities lending activities and related services: any share of revenue generated by the securities lending program paid to the securities lending agent(s) (revenue split); fees paid for cash collateral management services (including fees deducted from a pooled cash collateral reinvestment vehicle) that are not included in the revenue split; administrative fees that are not included in the revenue split; fees for indemnification that are not included in the revenue split; rebates paid to borrowers; and any other fees relating to the securities lending program that are not included in the revenue split, including a description of those other fees;
N/A
(3) The aggregate fees/compensation disclosed pursuant to paragraph (2); and
N/A
(4) Net income from securities lending activities (i.e., the dollar amount in paragraph (1) minus the dollar amount in paragraph (3)).
If a fee for a service is included in the revenue split, state that the fee is included in the revenue split.
N/A
(b) If the registrant is a closed-end management investment company, describe the services provided to the registrant by the securities lending agent in the registrants most recent fiscal year.
N/A
ITEM 13. EXHIBITS.
(a) File the exhibits listed below as part of this Form. Letter or number the exhibits in the sequence indicated.
Filed herewith.
SIGNATURES
[See General Instruction F]
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the Investment Company Act of 1940, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.
(Registrant) Pioneer High Income Trust
By (Signature and Title)* /s/ Lisa M. Jones
Lisa M. Jones, President & Chief Executive Officer
Date June 5, 2020
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the Investment Company Act of 1940, this report has been signed below by the following persons on behalf of the registrant and in the capacities and on the dates indicated.
By (Signature and Title)* /s/ Lisa M. Jones
Lisa M. Jones, President & Chief Executive Officer
Date June 5, 2020
By (Signature and Title)* /s/ Mark E. Bradley
Mark E. Bradley, Treasurer & Chief Accounting & Financial Officer
Date June 5, 2020
* Print the name and title of each signing officer under his or her signature.
