UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549
FORM N-CSR
CERTIFIED SHAREHOLDER REPORT OF REGISTERED MANAGEMENT
INVESTMENT COMPANIES
Investment Company Act file number | 811-5160 | |||||
|
| |||||
| Dreyfus New York AMT-Free Municipal Money Market Fund |
| ||||
| (Exact name of Registrant as specified in charter) |
| ||||
|
|
| ||||
|
c/o The Dreyfus Corporation 200 Park Avenue New York, New York 10166 |
| ||||
| (Address of principal executive offices) (Zip code) |
| ||||
|
|
| ||||
| Michael A. Rosenberg, Esq. 200 Park Avenue New York, New York 10166 |
| ||||
| (Name and address of agent for service) |
| ||||
| ||||||
Registrant's telephone number, including area code: | (212) 922-6000 | |||||
|
| |||||
Date of fiscal year end:
| 5/31 |
| ||||
Date of reporting period: | 11/30/10 |
| ||||
1 |
Dreyfus |
New York AMT-Free |
Municipal Money |
Market Fund |
SEMIANNUAL REPORT November 30, 2010
Save time. Save paper. View your next shareholder report online as soon as it’s available. Log into www.dreyfus.com and sign up for Dreyfus eCommunications. It’s simple and only takes a few minutes.
The views expressed in this report reflect those of the portfolio manager only through the end of the period covered and do not necessarily represent the views of Dreyfus or any other person in the Dreyfus organization. Any such views are subject to change at any time based upon market or other conditions and Dreyfus disclaims any responsibility to update such views.These views may not be relied on as investment advice and, because investment decisions for a Dreyfus fund are based on numerous factors, may not be relied on as an indication of trading intent on behalf of any Dreyfus fund.
Contents | |
THE FUND | |
2 | A Letter from the Chairman and CEO |
3 | Discussion of Fund Performance |
6 | Understanding Your Fund’s Expenses |
6 | Comparing Your Fund’s Expenses With Those of Other Funds |
7 | Statement of Investments |
15 | Statement of Assets and Liabilities |
16 | Statement of Operations |
17 | Statement of Changes in Net Assets |
18 | Financial Highlights |
19 | Notes to Financial Statements |
25 | Information About the Review and Approval of the Fund’s Management Agreement |
FOR MORE INFORMATION | |
Back Cover |
Dreyfus New York |
AMT-Free Municipal |
Money Market Fund |
The Fund |
A LETTER FROM THE CHAIRMAN AND CEO
Dear Shareholder:
We are pleased to present this semiannual report for Dreyfus NewYork AMT-Free Municipal Money Market Fund, covering the six-month period from June 1, 2010, through November 30, 2010.
Although U.S. GDP growth was positive throughout the reporting period, the economic recovery has been milder than historical averages. As a result, the Federal Reserve Board has maintained an aggressively accommodative monetary policy in order to moderate stubbornly high levels of unemployment and persistent weakness in housing markets.
We are cautiously optimistic regarding the U.S. economy’s prospects in 2011.A weaker U.S. dollar is likely to support exports and limit imports, residential construction appears set to begin recovering from depressed levels, and employment growth has begun to expand enough to generate gains in wage and salary income. However, we expect inflationary pressures and short-term interest rates to remain low, potentially preventing any significant rise in money market yields over the foreseeable future. So is your overall portfolio positioned accordingly? Talk with your financial advisor, who can help you evaluate your current “liquid asset” needs and your future portfolio investment needs.
For information about how the fund performed during the reporting period, as well as general market perspectives, we provide a Discussion of Fund Performance on the pages that follow.
Thank you for your continued confidence and support.
Jonathan R. Baum
Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
The Dreyfus Corporation
December 15, 2010
2
DISCUSSION OF FUND PERFORMANCE
For the period of June 1, 2010, through November 30, 2010, as provided by Joseph Irace, Senior Portfolio Manager
Fund and Market Performance Overview
For the six-month period ended November 30, 2010, Dreyfus NewYork AMT-Free Municipal Money Market Fund produced an annualized yield of 0.00%.Taking into account the effects of compounding, the fund produced an annualized effective yield of 0.00%.1
Money market yields remained at historical lows as the U.S. economy recovered sluggishly from recession and the Federal Reserve Board (the “Fed”) left short-term interest rates unchanged.
The Fund’s Investment Approach
The fund seeks as high a level of current income exempt from federal, New York state and New York city income taxes as is consistent with the preservation of capital and the maintenance of liquidity.The fund also seeks to provide income exempt from the federal Alternative Minimum Tax (“AMT”).
In pursuing this objective, we employ two primary strategies. First, we normally attempt to add value by constructing a diverse portfolio of high-quality municipal obligations that provide income exempt from federal, New York state and New York city personal income taxes. Second, we actively manage the fund’s average maturity based on our anticipation of supply-and-demand changes in NewYork’s short-term municipal marketplace.
For example, if we expect an increase in short-term supply, we may decrease the average maturity of the fund, which could enable us to take advantage of opportunities when short-term supply increases. Generally, yields tend to rise when there is an increase in new-issue supply competing for investor interest. New securities, which generally are issued with maturities in the one-year range, may in turn lengthen the fund’s average maturity if purchased. If we anticipate limited new-issue supply,
TheFund 3
DISCUSSION OF FUND PERFORMANCE (continued)
we may then look to extend the fund’s average maturity to maintain then-current yields for as long as we believe practical. In addition, we try to maintain an average maturity that reflects our view of short-term interest-rate trends and future supply-and-demand considerations.
Low Yields in a Subpar Recovery
While the U.S. economy continued to recover from recession during the reporting period, the rebound has been milder than historical averages. Manufacturing activity and corporate earnings have increased, but unemployment remained stubbornly high, and many regional housing markets have not yet improved meaningfully. In addition, these economic concerns had been exacerbated in the spring by a resurgent sovereign debt crisis in Europe.
Like most states, NewYork has remained under fiscal pressure.Although conditions on Wall Street have improved since the 2008 financial crisis, state tax revenues have continued to fall short of budgeted projections, resulting in financial challenges for NewYork and its localities that may persist for some time.
Supply-and-demand influences generally were favorable during the reporting period. Despite heavier borrowing needs nationally, the supply of newly issued municipal money market instruments remained relatively low, primarily due to the federally subsidized Build America Bonds program, which shifted a portion of municipal issuance to the taxable bond market. Meanwhile, demand remained robust, including from non-traditional investors seeking alternatives to taxable money market instruments.
In this environment, and as it has since December 2008, the Fed maintained its target for the overnight federal funds rate in a range between 0% and 0.25%. Later in the reporting period, with no room for additional reductions of the federal funds rate, the Fed embarked on a new round of quantitative easing in which it purchased $600 billion of U.S. Treasury securities. Since money market yields generally remained anchored by the historically low federal funds rate, tax-exempt money market instruments provided yields of little more than zero percent.
4
Focus on Liquidity and Capital Preservation
During the reporting period, we continued our conservative investment posture, emphasizing direct, high-quality municipal obligations that were deemed creditworthy by our credit analysts.We also favored instruments backed by pledged tax appropriations or revenues from facilities providing essential services. In addition, we shied away from the state’s general obligation debt and instruments issued by entities that depend heavily on state aid. Finally, we maintained the fund’s weighted average maturity in a range that was roughly in line with industry averages.
Increased Supply Could Lift Yields
Despite ongoing signs of economic recovery, inflation has been negligible, and the Fed appears set to maintain its aggressively accommodative monetary policy for some time to come. Therefore, we believe the prudent course continues to be an emphasis on preservation of capital and liquidity. However, we currently expect the supply of newly issued tax-exempt money market instruments to trend higher in 2011 after the Build America Bonds program expires, which could support higher yields.As always, we are prepared to adjust the fund’s strategies should economic and market conditions change.
December 15, 2010
An investment in the fund is not insured or guaranteed by the FDIC or any other government | |
agency.Although the fund seeks to preserve the value of your investment at $1.00 per share, it is | |
possible to lose money by investing in the fund. | |
Short-term municipal securities holdings, while rated in the highest rating category by one or more | |
NRSRO (or unrated, if deemed of comparable quality by Dreyfus), involve credit and liquidity | |
risks and risk of principal loss. | |
1 | Annualized effective yield is based upon dividends declared daily and reinvested monthly. Past |
performance is no guarantee of future results.Yields fluctuate. Income may be subject to state and | |
local taxes for non-NewYork residents.Yields provided reflect the absorption of certain fund | |
expenses by The Dreyfus Corporation pursuant to an undertaking in effect that may be extended | |
terminated or modified at any time. Had these expenses not been absorbed, fund yields would | |
have been lower. |
TheFund 5
UNDERSTANDING YOUR FUND’S EXPENSES (Unaudited)
As a mutual fund investor, you pay ongoing expenses, such as management fees and other expenses. Using the information below, you can estimate how these expenses affect your investment and compare them with the expenses of other funds.You also may pay one-time transaction expenses, including sales charges (loads) and redemption fees, which are not shown in this section and would have resulted in higher total expenses. For more information, see your fund’s prospectus or talk to your financial adviser.
Review your fund’s expenses
The table below shows the expenses you would have paid on a $1,000 investment in Dreyfus NewYork AMT-Free Municipal Money Market Fund from June 1, 2010 to November 30, 2010. It also shows how much a $1,000 investment would be worth at the close of the period, assuming actual returns and expenses.
Expenses and Value of a $1,000 Investment
assuming actual returns for the six months ended November 30, 2010
Expenses paid per $1,000† | $ 2.11 |
Ending value (after expenses) | $1,000.00 |
COMPARING YOUR FUND’S EXPENSES
WITH THOSE OF OTHER FUNDS (Unaudited)
Using the SEC’s method to compare expenses
The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has established guidelines to help investors assess fund expenses. Per these guidelines, the table below shows your fund’s expenses based on a $1,000 investment, assuming a hypothetical 5% annualized return. You can use this information to compare the ongoing expenses (but not transaction expenses or total cost) of investing in the fund with those of other funds.All mutual fund shareholder reports will provide this information to help you make this comparison. Please note that you cannot use this information to estimate your actual ending account balance and expenses paid during the period.
Expenses and Value of a $1,000 Investment
assuming a hypothetical 5% annualized return for the six months ended November 30, 2010
Expenses paid per $1,000† | $ 2.13 |
Ending value (after expenses) | $1,022.96 |
† Expenses are equal to the fund’s annualized expense ratio of .42%, multiplied by the average account value over the |
period, multiplied by 183/365 (to reflect the one-half year period). |
6
STATEMENT OF INVESTMENTS
November 30, 2010 (Unaudited)
Short-Term | Coupon | Maturity | Principal | ||
Investments—99.6% | Rate (%) | Date | Amount ($) | Value ($) | |
Albany Industrial Development | |||||
Agency, Civic Facility Revenue | |||||
(Albany Medical Center | |||||
Hospital Project) (LOC; RBS | |||||
Citizens NA) | 0.43 | 12/7/10 | 3,265,000 | a | 3,265,000 |
Albany Industrial Development | |||||
Agency, Civic Facility Revenue | |||||
(Renaissance Corporation of | |||||
Albany Project) | |||||
(LOC; M&T Trust) | 0.35 | 12/7/10 | 2,545,000 | a | 2,545,000 |
Belfast Central School District, | |||||
GO Notes, BAN | 1.75 | 5/17/11 | 1,800,000 | 1,805,284 | |
Bleecker Terrace Housing | |||||
Development Corporation, | |||||
Housing Development Revenue | |||||
(Bleecker Terrace Apartments | |||||
Project) (LOC; FHLB) | 0.50 | 12/7/10 | 1,285,000 | a | 1,285,000 |
Elmira City School District, | |||||
GO Notes, BAN | 1.50 | 6/30/11 | 2,900,000 | 2,905,800 | |
Erie County Industrial Development | |||||
Agency, Civic Facility Revenue | |||||
(People Inc. Project) (LOC; | |||||
Key Bank) | 0.87 | 12/7/10 | 75,000 | a | 75,000 |
Erie County Industrial Development | |||||
Agency, Civic Facility Revenue | |||||
(United Cerebral Palsy | |||||
Association Project) | |||||
(LOC; Key Bank) | 0.87 | 12/7/10 | 30,000 | a | 30,000 |
Evans, | |||||
GO Notes, BAN | 1.25 | 10/6/11 | 1,000,000 | 1,001,668 | |
Forestville Central School | |||||
District, GO Notes, BAN | 2.00 | 7/14/11 | 1,507,997 | 1,515,989 | |
Herkimer County Industrial | |||||
Development Agency, Civic | |||||
Facility Revenue (Templeton | |||||
Foundation Project) | |||||
(LOC; Key Bank) | 0.87 | 12/7/10 | 5,000 | a | 5,000 |
Lancaster Industrial Development | |||||
Agency, Civic Facility Revenue | |||||
(GreenField Manor, Inc. | |||||
Project) (LOC; M&T Trust) | 0.33 | 12/7/10 | 300,000 | a | 300,000 |
TheFund 7
STATEMENT OF INVESTMENTS (Unaudited) (continued)
Short-Term | Coupon | Maturity | Principal | ||
Investments (continued) | Rate (%) | Date | Amount ($) | Value ($) | |
Metropolitan Transportation | |||||
Authority, Dedicated Tax Fund | |||||
Revenue (Insured; Assured | |||||
Guaranty Municipal Corp. and | |||||
Liquidity Facility; Dexia | |||||
Credit Locale) | 0.34 | 12/7/10 | 9,400,000 | a | 9,400,000 |
Metropolitan Transportation | |||||
Authority, RAN | 2.00 | 12/31/10 | 3,000,000 | 3,003,963 | |
Metropolitan Transportation | |||||
Authority, Transportation | |||||
Revenue, Refunding (Insured; | |||||
Assured Guaranty Municipal | |||||
Corp. and Liquidity Facility; | |||||
Dexia Credit Locale) | 0.30 | 12/7/10 | 6,220,000 | a | 6,220,000 |
Metropolitan Transportation | |||||
Authority, Transportation | |||||
Revenue, Refunding (Insured; | |||||
Assured Guaranty Municipal | |||||
Corp. and Liquidity Facility; | |||||
Westdeutsche Landesbank) | 0.34 | 12/7/10 | 8,225,000 | a | 8,225,000 |
Monroe County Industrial | |||||
Development Agency, Civic | |||||
Facility Revenue (YMCA of | |||||
Greater Rochester Project) | |||||
(LOC; M&T Trust) | 0.35 | 12/7/10 | 6,460,000 | a | 6,460,000 |
Monroe County Industrial | |||||
Development Agency, Revenue | |||||
(HDF-RWC Project 1, LLC— | |||||
Robert Weslayan College | |||||
Project) (LOC; M&T Trust) | 0.34 | 12/7/10 | 2,555,000 | a | 2,555,000 |
Nassau County Industrial | |||||
Development Agency, Civic | |||||
Facility Revenue (North Shore | |||||
Hebrew Academy High School | |||||
Project) (LOC; Banco Santander) | 0.45 | 12/7/10 | 11,200,000 | a | 11,200,000 |
Nassau County Industrial | |||||
Development Agency, Civic | |||||
Facility Revenue (Saint Mary’s | |||||
Children Project) (LOC; | |||||
Commerce Bank NA) | 0.38 | 12/7/10 | 1,395,000 | a | 1,395,000 |
8
Short-Term | Coupon | Maturity | Principal | ||
Investments (continued) | Rate (%) | Date | Amount ($) | Value ($) | |
New York City, | |||||
GO Notes (Liquidity Facility; | |||||
Landesbank Hessen-Thuringen | |||||
Girozentrale) | 0.31 | 12/1/10 | 9,500,000 | a | 9,500,000 |
New York City, | |||||
GO Notes (LOC; Bank of America) | 0.29 | 12/7/10 | 4,900,000 | a | 4,900,000 |
New York City, | |||||
GO Notes (LOC; California | |||||
Public Employees | |||||
Retirement System) | 0.28 | 12/1/10 | 12,000,000 | a | 12,000,000 |
New York City, | |||||
GO Notes (LOC; Union Bank NA) | 0.33 | 12/7/10 | 5,300,000 | a | 5,300,000 |
New York City, | |||||
GO Notes (LOC; Westdeutsche | |||||
Landesbank) | 0.32 | 12/7/10 | 11,400,000 | a | 11,400,000 |
New York City Capital Resource | |||||
Corporation, Recovery Zone | |||||
Facility Revenue (Arverne by | |||||
the Sea Project) (LOC; TD Bank) | 0.30 | 12/7/10 | 3,600,000 | a | 3,600,000 |
New York City Housing Development | |||||
Corporation, MFHR (Liquidity | |||||
Facility; Citibank NA) | 0.30 | 12/7/10 | 3,600,000 | a,b | 3,600,000 |
New York City Industrial | |||||
Development Agency, Civic | |||||
Facility Revenue (Birch Wathen | |||||
Lenox School Project) | |||||
(LOC; TD Bank) | 0.35 | 12/7/10 | 3,300,000 | a | 3,300,000 |
New York City Industrial | |||||
Development Agency, Civic | |||||
Facility Revenue (Brooklyn | |||||
United Methodist Church Home | |||||
Project) (LOC; TD Bank) | 0.30 | 12/7/10 | 5,095,000 | a | 5,095,000 |
New York City Industrial | |||||
Development Agency, Civic | |||||
Facility Revenue (French | |||||
Institute-Alliance Francaise | |||||
de New York—Federation of | |||||
French Alliances in the United | |||||
States Project) (LOC; M&T Trust) | 0.55 | 12/7/10 | 1,635,000 | a | 1,635,000 |
TheFund 9
STATEMENT OF INVESTMENTS (Unaudited) (continued)
Short-Term | Coupon | Maturity | Principal | ||
Investments (continued) | Rate (%) | Date | Amount ($) | Value ($) | |
New York City Industrial | |||||
Development Agency, Civic | |||||
Facility Revenue (The | |||||
Professional Children’s School | |||||
Project) (LOC; Wells Fargo Bank) | 0.33 | 12/7/10 | 1,700,000 | a | 1,700,000 |
New York City Industrial | |||||
Development Agency, Civic | |||||
Facility Revenue (Village | |||||
Community School Project) | |||||
(LOC; M&T Trust) | 0.55 | 12/7/10 | 940,000 | a | 940,000 |
New York Liberty Development | |||||
Corporation, Liberty Revenue | |||||
(World Trade Center Project) | 0.32 | 5/5/11 | 11,000,000 | 11,000,000 | |
New York Local Government | |||||
Assistance Corporation, GO | |||||
Notes (LOC: Bayerische | |||||
Landesbank and | |||||
Westdeutsche Landesbank) | 0.30 | 12/7/10 | 6,000,000 | a | 6,000,000 |
New York Local Government | |||||
Assistance Corporation, GO | |||||
Notes (LOC; Landesbank | |||||
Hessen-Thuringen Girozentrale) | 0.29 | 12/7/10 | 13,100,000 | a | 13,100,000 |
New York Local Government | |||||
Assistance Corporation, | |||||
Subordinate Lien Revenue, | |||||
Refunding (Insured; Assured | |||||
Guaranty Municipal Corp. and | |||||
Liquidity Facility; | |||||
Westdeutsche Landesbank) | 0.35 | 12/7/10 | 1,500,000 | a | 1,500,000 |
New York State Dormitory | |||||
Authority, Revenue (Long | |||||
Island University) (LOC; FHLB) | 0.28 | 12/7/10 | 4,000,000 | a | 4,000,000 |
New York State Dormitory | |||||
Authority, Revenue (Mount | |||||
Saint Mary College) (LOC; | |||||
JPMorgan Chase Bank) | 0.30 | 12/7/10 | 8,400,000 | a | 8,400,000 |
New York State Dormitory | |||||
Authority, Revenue (University | |||||
of Rochester) (LOC; | |||||
Bank of America) | 0.28 | 12/7/10 | 3,000,000 | a | 3,000,000 |
10
Short-Term | Coupon | Maturity | Principal | ||
Investments (continued) | Rate (%) | Date | Amount ($) | Value ($) | |
New York State Housing Finance | |||||
Agency, Housing Revenue | |||||
(Baisley Park Gardens) (LOC; | |||||
Citibank NA) | 0.28 | 12/7/10 | 3,000,000 | a | 3,000,000 |
New York State Thruway Authority, | |||||
General Revenue, BAN | 3.00 | 7/15/11 | 500,000 | 506,905 | |
Olean, | |||||
GO Notes, BAN | 1.50 | 8/11/11 | 2,000,000 | 2,002,655 | |
Ontario County Industrial | |||||
Development Agency, Civic | |||||
Facility Revenue (Friends of | |||||
the Finger Lakes Performing | |||||
Arts Center, Inc. Civic | |||||
Facility) (LOC; FHLB) | 0.43 | 12/7/10 | 3,225,000 | a | 3,225,000 |
Oswego County Industrial | |||||
Development Agency, Civic | |||||
Facility Revenue (Springside | |||||
at Seneca Hill, Inc. Project) | |||||
(LOC; M&T Trust) | 0.40 | 12/7/10 | 2,360,000 | a | 2,360,000 |
Otsego County Industrial | |||||
Development Agency, Civic | |||||
Facility Revenue (Templeton | |||||
Foundation Project) | |||||
(LOC; Key Bank) | 0.87 | 12/7/10 | 95,000 | a | 95,000 |
Port Authority of New York and | |||||
New Jersey, Equipment Notes | 0.36 | 12/7/10 | 2,800,000 | a | 2,800,000 |
Rensselaer Industrial Development | |||||
Agency, Senior Housing Revenue | |||||
(Brunswick Senior Housing | |||||
Project) (LOC; FHLB) | 0.31 | 12/1/10 | 3,840,000 | a | 3,840,000 |
Rockland County Industrial | |||||
Development Authority, Revenue | |||||
(Northern Manor Multicare | |||||
Center, Inc. Project) (LOC; | |||||
M&T Trust) | 0.40 | 12/7/10 | 2,100,000 | a | 2,100,000 |
Rome, | |||||
GO Notes, BAN | 1.25 | 1/20/11 | 1,700,000 | 1,700,577 | |
Sag Harbor Union Free School | |||||
District, GO Notes, TAN | 1.50 | 6/23/11 | 1,700,000 | 1,703,751 |
TheFund 11
STATEMENT OF INVESTMENTS (Unaudited) (continued)
Short-Term | Coupon | Maturity | Principal | ||
Investments (continued) | Rate (%) | Date | Amount ($) | Value ($) | |
Schenectady, | |||||
GO Notes, BAN | 1.50 | 5/20/11 | 5,600,000 | 5,606,409 | |
Springs Union Free School | |||||
District, GO Notes, TAN | 1.50 | 6/30/11 | 1,100,000 | 1,105,704 | |
Suffolk County Industrial | |||||
Development Agency, Civic | |||||
Facility Revenue (Hampton Day | |||||
School Civic Facility) (LOC; | |||||
JPMorgan Chase Bank) | 0.33 | 12/7/10 | 2,600,000 | a | 2,600,000 |
Sullivan County, | |||||
GO Notes, BAN | 1.50 | 3/10/11 | 2,590,000 | 2,594,880 | |
Sullivan County, | |||||
GO Notes, TAN | 1.00 | 3/10/11 | 1,900,000 | 1,902,580 | |
Syracuse Industrial Development | |||||
Agency, Civic Facility Revenue | |||||
(Community Development | |||||
Properties-Larned Project) | |||||
(LOC; M&T Trust) | 0.35 | 12/7/10 | 2,000,000 | a | 2,000,000 |
Ticonderoga Central School | |||||
District, GO Notes, BAN | 2.00 | 6/24/11 | 2,800,000 | 2,813,185 | |
Tompkins County Industrial | |||||
Development Agency, Continuing | |||||
Care Retirement Community | |||||
Revenue (Kendal at Ithaca, | |||||
Inc. Project) (LOC; | |||||
Wells Fargo Bank) | 0.35 | 12/7/10 | 4,660,000 | a | 4,660,000 |
Westchester County Industrial | |||||
Development Agency, Civic | |||||
Facility Revenue (Westchester | |||||
Arts Council, Inc. Project) | |||||
(LOC; Wells Fargo Bank) | 0.33 | 12/7/10 | 2,880,000 | a | 2,880,000 |
Total Investments (cost $222,659,350) | 99.6% | 222,659,350 | |||
Cash and Receivables (Net) | .4% | 955,295 | |||
Net Assets | 100.0% | 223,614,645 |
a Variable rate demand note—rate shown is the interest rate in effect at November 30, 2010. Maturity date represents |
the next demand date, or the ultimate maturity date if earlier. |
b Security exempt from registration under Rule 144A of the Securities Act of 1933.This security may be resold in |
transactions exempt from registration, normally to qualified institutional buyers.At November 30, 2010, this security |
amounted to $3,600,000 or 1.6% of net assets. |
12
Summary of Abbreviations | |||
ABAG | Association of Bay Area Governments | ACA | American Capital Access |
AGC | ACE Guaranty Corporation | AGIC | Asset Guaranty Insurance Company |
AMBAC | American Municipal Bond | ARRN | Adjustable Rate Receipt Notes |
Assurance Corporation | |||
BAN | Bond Anticipation Notes | BPA | Bond Purchase Agreement |
CIFG | CDC Ixis Financial Guaranty | COP | Certificate of Participation |
CP | Commercial Paper | EDR | Economic Development Revenue |
EIR | Environmental Improvement Revenue | FGIC | Financial Guaranty Insurance |
Company | |||
FHA | Federal Housing Administration | FHLB | Federal Home Loan Bank |
FHLMC | Federal Home Loan Mortgage | FNMA | Federal National |
Corporation | Mortgage Association | ||
GAN | Grant Anticipation Notes | GIC | Guaranteed Investment Contract |
GNMA | Government National | GO | General Obligation |
Mortgage Association | |||
HR | Hospital Revenue | IDB | Industrial Development Board |
IDC | Industrial Development Corporation | IDR | Industrial Development Revenue |
LOC | Letter of Credit | LOR | Limited Obligation Revenue |
LR | Lease Revenue | MFHR | Multi-Family Housing Revenue |
MFMR | Multi-Family Mortgage Revenue | PCR | Pollution Control Revenue |
PILOT | Payment in Lieu of Taxes | PUTTERS Puttable Tax-Exempt Receipts | |
RAC | Revenue Anticipation Certificates | RAN | Revenue Anticipation Notes |
RAW | Revenue Anticipation Warrants | RRR | Resources Recovery Revenue |
SAAN | State Aid Anticipation Notes | SBPA | Standby Bond Purchase Agreement |
SFHR | Single Family Housing Revenue | SFMR | Single Family Mortgage Revenue |
SONYMA | State of New York Mortgage Agency | SWDR | Solid Waste Disposal Revenue |
TAN | Tax Anticipation Notes | TAW | Tax Anticipation Warrants |
TRAN | Tax and Revenue Anticipation Notes | XLCA | XL Capital Assurance |
TheFund 13
STATEMENT OF INVESTMENTS (Unaudited) (continued)
Summary of Combined Ratings (Unaudited) | |||||
Fitch | or | Moody’s | or | Standard & Poor’s | Value (%)† |
F1+,F1 | VMIG1,MIG1,P1 | SP1+,SP1,A1+,A1 | 78.5 | ||
AAA,AA,Ac | Aaa,Aa,Ac | AAA,AA,Ac | 5.8 | ||
Not Ratedd | Not Ratedd | Not Ratedd | 15.7 | ||
100.0 |
† Based on total investments. |
c Notes which are not F, MIG and SP rated are represented by bond ratings of the issuers. |
d Securities which, while not rated by Fitch, Moody’s and Standard & Poor’s, have been determined by the Manager to |
be of comparable quality to those rated securities in which the fund may invest. |
See notes to financial statements.
14
STATEMENT OF ASSETS AND LIABILITIES
November 30, 2010 (Unaudited)
Cost | Value | |
Assets ($): | ||
Investments in securities—See Statement of Investments | 222,659,350 | 222,659,350 |
Cash | 2,140,794 | |
Interest receivable | 262,768 | |
Prepaid expenses | 40,190 | |
225,103,102 | ||
Liabilities ($): | ||
Due to The Dreyfus Corporation and affiliates—Note 2(b) | 62,983 | |
Payable for shares of Beneficial Interest redeemed | 853,528 | |
Payable for investment securities purchased | 513,238 | |
Accrued expenses | 58,708 | |
1,488,457 | ||
Net Assets ($) | 223,614,645 | |
Composition of Net Assets ($): | ||
Paid-in capital | 223,604,702 | |
Accumulated net realized gain (loss) on investments | 9,943 | |
Net Assets ($) | 223,614,645 | |
Shares Outstanding | ||
(unlimited number of $.001 par value shares of Beneficial Interest authorized) | 223,637,813 | |
Net Asset Value, offering and redemption price per share ($) | 1.00 | |
See notes to financial statements. |
TheFund 15
STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS
Six Months Ended November 30, 2010 (Unaudited)
Investment Income ($): | |
Interest Income | 520,549 |
Expenses: | |
Management fee—Note 2(a) | 617,914 |
Shareholder servicing costs—Note 2(b) | 111,372 |
Professional fees | 42,304 |
Trustees’ fees and expenses—Note 2(c) | 19,200 |
Custodian fees—Note 2(b) | 15,764 |
Prospectus and shareholders’ reports | 13,475 |
Registration fees | 9,628 |
Miscellaneous | 11,208 |
Total Expenses | 840,865 |
Less—reduction in expenses due to undertaking—Note 2(a) | (320,165) |
Less—reduction in fees due to earnings credits—Note 2(b) | (161) |
Net Expenses | 520,539 |
Investment Income—Net | 10 |
Net Realized Gain (Loss) on Investments—Note 1(b) ($) | 9,943 |
Net Increase in Net Assets Resulting from Operations | 9,953 |
See notes to financial statements. |
16
STATEMENT OF CHANGES IN NET ASSETS
Six Months Ended | ||
November 30, 2010 | Year Ended | |
(Unaudited) | May 31, 2010 | |
Operations ($): | ||
Investment income—net | 10 | 173,915 |
Net realized gain (loss) on investments | 9,943 | — |
Net Increase (Decrease) in Net Assets | ||
Resulting from Operations | 9,953 | 173,915 |
Dividends to Shareholders from ($): | ||
Investment income—net | (10) | (173,915) |
Beneficial Interest Transactions ($1.00 per share): | ||
Net proceeds from shares sold | 132,785,232 | 436,797,023 |
Dividends reinvested | 10 | 169,405 |
Cost of shares redeemed | (172,406,361) | (515,059,789) |
Increase (Decrease) in Net Assets from | ||
Beneficial Interest Transactions | (39,621,119) | (78,093,361) |
Total Increase (Decrease) in Net Assets | (39,611,176) | (78,093,361) |
Net Assets ($): | ||
Beginning of Period | 263,225,821 | 341,319,182 |
End of Period | 223,614,645 | 263,225,821 |
See notes to financial statements. |
TheFund 17
FINANCIAL HIGHLIGHTS
The following table describes the performance for the fiscal periods indicated.Total return shows how much your investment in the fund would have increased (or decreased) during each period, assuming you had reinvested all dividends and dis-tributions.These figures have been derived from the fund’s financial statements.
Six Months Ended | ||||||
November 30, 2010 | Year Ended May 31, | |||||
(Unaudited) | 2010 | 2009 | 2008 | 2007 | 2006 | |
Per Share Data ($): | ||||||
Net asset value, | ||||||
beginning of period | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 |
Investment Operations: | ||||||
Investment income—net | .000a | .001 | .011 | .026 | .030 | .022 |
Distributions: | ||||||
Dividends from | ||||||
investment income—net | (.000)a | (.001) | (.011) | (.026) | (.030) | (.022) |
Net asset value, end of period | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 |
Total Return (%) | .00b,c | .05 | 1.15 | 2.62 | 3.03 | 2.26 |
Ratios/Supplemental Data (%): | ||||||
Ratio of total expenses | ||||||
to average net assets | .68c | .66 | .68 | .65 | .68 | .66 |
Ratio of net expenses | ||||||
to average net assets | .42c | .47 | .67 | .65 | .68 | .65 |
Ratio of net investment income | ||||||
to average net assets | .00b,c | .06 | 1.11 | 2.57 | 2.99 | 2.24 |
Net Assets, end of period | ||||||
($ x 1,000) | 223,615 263,226 | 341,319 | 272,327 | 231,195 | 286,778 |
a | Amount represents less than $.001 per share. |
b | Amount represents less than .01%. |
c | Annualized. |
See notes to financial statements.
18
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Unaudited)
NOTE 1—Significant Accounting Policies:
Dreyfus New York AMT-Free Municipal Money Market Fund (the “fund”) is registered under the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended (the “Act”), as a non-diversified open-end management investment company.The fund’s investment objective is to seek as high a level of current income exempt from federal, New York state and New York city income taxes as is consistent with the preservation of capital and the maintenance of liquidity.The Dreyfus Corporation (the “Manager” or “Dreyfus”), a wholly-owned subsidiary of The Bank of New York Mellon Corporation (“BNY Mellon”), serves as the fund’s investment adviser. MBSC Securities Corporation (the “Distributor”), a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Manager, is the distributor of the fund’s shares, which are sold without a sales charge.
It is the fund’s policy to maintain a continuous net asset value per share of $1.00; the fund has adopted certain investment, portfolio valuation and dividend and distribution policies to enable it to do so.There is no assurance, however, that the fund will be able to maintain a stable net asset value per share of $1.00.
The Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) Accounting Standards Codification (“ASC”) is the exclusive reference of authoritative U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (“GAAP”) recognized by the FASB to be applied by nongovernmental entities. Rules and interpretive releases of the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) under authority of federal laws are also sources of authoritative GAAP for SEC registrants.The fund’s financial statements are prepared in accordance with GAAP, which may require the use of management estimates and assumptions. Actual results could differ from those estimates.
The fund enters into contracts that contain a variety of indemnifications. The fund’s maximum exposure under these arrangements is unknown.The fund does not anticipate recognizing any loss related to these arrangements.
TheFund 19
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Unaudited) (continued)
(a) Portfolio valuation: Investments in securities are valued at amortized cost in accordance with Rule 2a-7 of the Act, which has been determined by the Board of Trustees to represent the fair value of the fund’s investments.
The fair value of a financial instrument is the amount that would be received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement date (i.e. the exit price). GAAP establishes a fair value hierarchy that prioritizes the inputs of valuation techniques used to measure fair value.This hierarchy gives the highest priority to unadjusted quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities (Level 1 measurements) and the lowest priority to unobservable inputs (Level 3 measurements).
Additionally, GAAP provides guidance on determining whether the volume and activity in a market has decreased significantly and whether such a decrease in activity results in transactions that are not orderly. GAAP requires enhanced disclosures around valuation inputs and techniques used during annual and interim periods.
Various inputs are used in determining the value of the fund’s investments relating to fair value measurements.These inputs are summarized in the three broad levels listed below:
Level 1—unadjusted quoted prices in active markets for identical investments.
Level 2—other significant observable inputs (including quoted prices for similar investments, interest rates, prepayment speeds, credit risk, etc.).
Level 3—significant unobservable inputs (including the fund’s own assumptions in determining the fair value of investments).
The inputs or methodology used for valuing securities are not necessarily an indication of the risk associated with investing in those securities. For example, money market securities are valued using amortized cost, in accordance with rules under the Act. Generally, amortized cost
20
approximates the current fair value of a security, but since the value is not obtained from a quoted price in an active market, such securities are reflected as Level 2.
The following is a summary of the inputs used as of November 30, 2010 in valuing the fund’s investments:
Short-Term | |
Valuation Inputs | Investments ($)† |
Level 1—Unadjusted Quoted Prices | — |
Level 2—Other Significant Observable Inputs | 222,659,350 |
Level 3—Significant Unobservable Inputs | — |
Total | 222,659,350 |
† See Statement of Investments for additional detailed categorizations.
(b) Securities transactions and investment income: Securities transactions are recorded on a trade date basis. Interest income, adjusted for accretion of discount and amortization of premium on investments, is earned from settlement date and recognized on the accrual basis. Realized gains and losses from securities transactions are recorded on the identified cost basis. Cost of investments represents amortized cost.
The fund follows an investment policy of investing primarily in municipal obligations of one state. Economic changes affecting the state and certain of its public bodies and municipalities may affect the ability of issuers within the state to pay interest on, or repay principal of, municipal obligations held by the fund.
(c) Dividends to shareholders: It is the policy of the fund to declare dividends daily from investment income-net. Such dividends are paid monthly. Dividends from net realized capital gains, if any, are normally declared and paid annually, but the fund may make distributions on a more frequent basis to comply with the distribution requirements of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “Code”).To the extent that net realized capital gains can be offset by capital loss carryovers, it is the policy of the fund not to distribute such gains.
TheFund 21
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Unaudited) (continued)
(d) Federal income taxes: It is the policy of the fund to continue to qualify as a regulated investment company, which can distribute tax exempt dividends, by complying with the applicable provisions of the Code, and to make distributions of income and net realized capital gain sufficient to relieve it from substantially all federal income and excise taxes.
As of and during the period ended November 30, 2010, the fund did not have any liabilities for any uncertain tax positions.The fund recognizes interest and penalties, if any, related to uncertain tax positions as income tax expense in the Statement of Operations. During the period, the fund did not incur any interest or penalties.
Each of the tax years in the three-year period ended May 31, 2010 remains subject to examination by the Internal Revenue Service and state taxing authorities.
The tax character of distributions paid to shareholders during the fiscal year ended May 31, 2010 was all tax exempt income.The tax character of current year distributions will be determined at the end of the current fiscal year.
At November 30, 2010, the cost of investments for federal income tax purposes was substantially the same as for financial reporting purposes (see the Statement of Investments).
NOTE 2—Management Fee and Other Transactions With Affiliates:
(a) Pursuant to a management agreement (“Agreement”) with the Manager, the management fee is computed at the annual rate of .50% of the value of the fund’s average daily net assets and is payable monthly. The Agreement provides that if in any full fiscal year the aggregate expenses of the fund, exclusive of taxes, brokerage fees, interest on borrowings and extraordinary expenses, exceed 1 1 / 2% of the value of the fund’s average daily net assets, the fund may deduct, from the payments to be made to the Manager or the Manager will bear,
22
such excess expense. During the period ended November 30, 2010, there was no expense reimbursement pursuant to the Agreement.
The Manager has undertaken to reimburse expenses in the event that current yields drop below a certain level. Such expense limitations may fluctuate daily, are voluntary and not contractual and may be terminated at any time. The reduction in expenses, pursuant to the undertaking, amounted to $320,165 during the period ended November 30, 2010.
(b) Under the Shareholder Services Plan, the fund reimburses the Distributor an amount not to exceed an annual rate of .25% of the value of the fund’s average daily net assets for certain allocated expenses of providing personal services and/or maintaining shareholder accounts.The services provided may include personal services relating to shareholder accounts, such as answering shareholder inquiries regarding the fund and providing reports and other information, and services related to the maintenance of shareholder accounts. During the period ended November 30, 2010, the fund was charged $75,511 pursuant to the Shareholder Services Plan.
The fund compensates DreyfusTransfer, Inc., a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Manager, under a transfer agency agreement for providing personnel and facilities to perform transfer agency services for the fund. During the period ended November 30, 2010, the fund was charged $26,358 pursuant to the transfer agency agreement, which is included in Shareholder servicing costs in the Statement of Operations.
The fund has arrangements with the custodian and cash management bank whereby the fund may receive earnings credits when positive cash balances are maintained, which are used to offset custody and cash management fees. For financial reporting purposes, the fund includes net earnings credits as an expense offset in the Statement of Operations.
The fund compensates The Bank of NewYork Mellon, a subsidiary of BNY Mellon and an affiliate of Dreyfus, under a cash management agreement for performing cash management services related to fund
TheFund 23
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Unaudited) (continued)
subscriptions and redemptions. During the period ended November 30, 2010, the fund was charged $2,869 pursuant to the cash management agreement, which is included in Shareholder servicing costs in the Statement of Operations.These fees were partially offset by earnings credits of $161.
The fund also compensates The Bank of New York Mellon under a custody agreement for providing custodial services for the fund. During the period ended November 30, 2010, the fund was charged $15,764 pursuant to the custody agreement.
During the period ended November 30, 2010, the fund was charged $3,345 for services performed by the Chief Compliance Officer.
The components of “Due toThe Dreyfus Corporation and affiliates” in the Statement of Assets and Liabilities consist of: management fees $92,707, custodian fees $10,979, chief compliance officer fees $1,152 and transfer agency per account fees $13,125, which are offset against an expense reimbursement currently in effect in the amount of $54,980.
(c) Each Board member also serves as a Board member of other funds within the Dreyfus complex. Annual retainer fees and attendance fees are allocated to each fund based on net assets.
NOTE 3—Securities Transactions:
The fund is permitted to purchase or sell securities from or to certain affiliated funds under specified conditions outlined in procedures adopted by the Board of Trustees.The procedures have been designed to ensure that any purchase or sale of securities by the fund from or to another fund or portfolio that are, or could be, considered an affiliate by virtue of having a common investment adviser (or affiliated investment adviser), common Trustee and/or common officers, complies with Rule 17a-7 of the Act. During the period ended November 30, 2010, the fund engaged in purchases and sales of securities pursuant to Rule 17a-7 of the Act amounting to $46,645,000 and $51,220,000, respectively.
24
INFORMATION ABOUT THE REVIEW AND APPROVAL
OF THE FUND’S MANAGEMENT AGREEMENT (Unaudited)
At a meeting of the fund’s Board of Trustees held on November 8-9, 2010, the Board considered the renewal of the fund’s Management Agreement with Dreyfus pursuant to which Dreyfus provides the fund with investment advisory and administrative services (the “Agreement”). The Board members, none of whom are “interested persons” (as defined in the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended) of the fund, were assisted in their review by independent legal counsel and met with counsel in executive session separate from representatives of Dreyfus. In considering the renewal of the Agreement, the Board considered all factors that it believed to be relevant, including those discussed below.The Board did not identify any one factor as dispositive, and each Board member may have attributed different weights to the factors considered.
Analysis of Nature, Extent and Quality of Services Provided to the Fund.The Board members considered information previously provided to them in a presentation from representatives of Dreyfus regarding the nature, extent, and quality of the services provided to funds in the Dreyfus fund complex, and representatives of Dreyfus confirmed that there had been no material changes in this information. Dreyfus provided the number of open accounts in the fund, the fund’s asset size and the allocation of fund assets among distribution channels. Dreyfus also had previously provided information regarding the diverse intermediary relationships and distribution channels of funds in the Dreyfus fund complex and Dreyfus’ corresponding need for broad, deep, and diverse resources to be able to provide ongoing shareholder services to each dis tribution channel, including the distribution channel(s) for the fund.
The Board members also considered research support available to, and portfolio management capabilities of, the fund’s portfolio management personnel and that Dreyfus also provides oversight of day-to-day fund operations, including fund accounting and administration and assistance in meeting legal and regulatory requirements.The Board members also considered Dreyfus’ extensive administrative, accounting, and compliance infrastructures.
TheFund 25
INFORMATION ABOUT THE REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF THE
FUND’S MANAGEMENT AGREEMENT (Unaudited) (continued)
Comparative Analysis of the Fund’s Performance and Management Fee and Expense Ratio.The Board members reviewed reports prepared by Lipper, Inc. (“Lipper”), an independent provider of investment company data, which included information comparing (1) the fund’s performance with the performance of a group of comparable funds (the “Performance Group”) and with a broader group of funds (the “Performance Universe”), all for various periods ended September 30, 2010, and (2) the fund’s actual and contractual management fees and total expenses with those of a group of comparable funds (the “Expense Group”) and with a broader group of funds (the “Expense Universe”), the information for which was derived in part from fund financial statements available to Lipper as of September 30 , 2010. Dreyfus previously had furnished the Board with a description of the methodology Lipper used to select the Performance Group and Performance Universe and the Expense Group and Expense Universe.
Dreyfus representatives stated that the usefulness of performance comparisons may be affected by a number of factors, including different investment limitations that may be applicable to the fund and comparison funds.The Board members discussed the results of the comparisons and noted that the fund’s total return performance was above the Performance Group median for the various periods, except for the 1-year period, and variously at, above, or below the Performance Universe median for the various time periods, in all such cases with the fund’s performance being only one basis point lower than the applicable Performance Group or Performance Universe median.
The Board members also reviewed the range of actual and contractual management fees and total expenses of the Expense Group and Expense Universe funds and discussed the results of the comparisons. They noted that the fund’s contractual management fee was above the Expense Group median, the fund’s actual management fee was below the Expense Group median and was above the Expense Universe median, and the fund’s total expenses were below the Expense Group median and at the Expense Universe median.
26
The Board considered the current fee waiver and/or expense reimbursement arrangement undertaken by Dreyfus to support the fund’s 7-day yield from going negative in the current, historically low interest rate environment, and the Board noted the extent to which differences among the returns for the Performance Group funds might be attributable to similar undertakings.
Representatives of Dreyfus reviewed with the Board members the management or investment advisory fees paid to Dreyfus or its affiliates by funds in the same Lipper category as the fund (the “Similar Accounts”), and explained the nature of the Similar Accounts. Representatives of Dreyfus noted that Dreyfus does not manage institutional separate accounts considered to have similar investment strategies and policies as the fund.They discussed differences in fees paid and the relationship of the fees paid in light of any differences in the services provided and other relevant factors.The Board members considered the relevance of the fee information provided for the Similar Accounts to evaluate the appropriateness and reasonableness of the fund’s management fee.
Analysis of Profitability and Economies of Scale. Dreyfus’ representatives reviewed the expenses allocated and profit received by Dreyfus and the resulting profitability percentage for managing the fund, and the method used to determine the expenses and profit. The Board concluded that the profitability results were not unreasonable given the services rendered and service levels provided by Dreyfus. The Board also noted the expense limitation arrangement and its effect on Dreyfus’ profitability. The Board previously had been provided with information prepared by an independent consulting firm regarding Dreyfus’ approach to allocating costs to, and determining the profitability of, individual funds and the entire Dreyfus fund complex.The consulting firm also had analyzed where any economies of scale might emerge in conn ection with the management of a fund.
TheFund 27
INFORMATION ABOUT THE REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF THE
FUND’S MANAGEMENT AGREEMENT (Unaudited) (continued)
The Board’s counsel stated that the Board members should consider the profitability analysis (1) as part of their evaluation of whether the fees under the Agreement bear a reasonable relationship to the mix of services provided by Dreyfus, including the nature, extent, and quality of such services, and (2) in light of the relevant circumstances for the fund and the extent to which economies of scale would be realized if the fund grows and whether fee levels reflect these economies of scale for the benefit of fund shareholders. Dreyfus representatives noted that a discussion of economies of scale is predicated on a fund having achieved a substantial size with increasing assets and that, if a fund’s assets had been stable or decreasing, the possibility that Dreyfus may have realized any economies of scale would be less. They also noted that, as a result of shared and allocated costs among funds in the Drey fus funds complex, the extent of economies of scale could depend substantially on the level of assets in the complex as a whole, so that increases and decreases in complex-wide assets can affect potential economies of scale in a manner that is disproportionate to, or even in the opposite direction from, changes in the fund’s asset level. The Board members also considered potential benefits to Dreyfus from acting as investment adviser and noted that there were no soft dollar arrangements in effect for trading the fund’s investments.
At the conclusion of these discussions, the Board agreed that it had been furnished with sufficient information to make an informed business decision with respect to the renewal of the Agreement. Based on the discussions and considerations as described above, the Board concluded and determined as follows.
The Board concluded that the nature, extent, and quality of the services provided by Dreyfus are adequate and appropriate.
The Board was satisfied with the fund’s performance, in light of the considerations described above.
The Board concluded that the fee paid to Dreyfus was reasonable in light of the considerations described above.
28
The Board determined that the economies of scale which may accrue to Dreyfus and its affiliates in connection with the management of the fund had been adequately considered by Dreyfus in connection with the fee rate charged to the fund pursuant to the Agreement and that, to the extent in the future it were determined that material economies of scale had not been shared with the fund, the Board would seek to have those economies of scale shared with the fund.
The Board members considered these conclusions and determinations, along with information received on a routine and regular basis throughout the year. In addition, it should be noted that the Board’s consideration of the contractual fee arrangements for this fund had the benefit of a number of years of reviews of prior or similar agreements during which lengthy discussions took place between the Board members and Dreyfus representatives. Certain aspects of the arrangements may receive greater scrutiny in some years than in others, and the Board members’ conclusions may be based, in part, on their consideration of the same or similar arrangements in prior years. The Board members determined that renewal of the Agreement was in the best interests of the fund and its shareholders.
TheFund 29
Item 2. Code of Ethics.
Not applicable.
Item 3. Audit Committee Financial Expert.
Not applicable.
Item 4. Principal Accountant Fees and Services.
Not applicable.
Item 5. Audit Committee of Listed Registrants.
Not applicable.
Item 6. Investments.
(a) Not applicable.
Item 7. Disclosure of Proxy Voting Policies and Procedures for Closed-End Management Investment Companies.
Not applicable.
Item 8. Portfolio Managers of Closed-End Management Investment Companies.
Not applicable.
Item 9. Purchases of Equity Securities by Closed-End Management Investment Companies and Affiliated Purchasers.
Not applicable. [CLOSED END FUNDS ONLY]
Item 10. Submission of Matters to a Vote of Security Holders.
There have been no material changes to the procedures applicable to Item 10.
Item 11. Controls and Procedures.
(a) The Registrant's principal executive and principal financial officers have concluded, based on their evaluation of the Registrant's disclosure controls and procedures as of a date within 90 days of the filing date of this report, that the Registrant's disclosure controls and procedures are reasonably designed to ensure that information required to be disclosed by the Registrant on Form N-CSR is recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the required time periods and that information required to be disclosed by the Registrant in the reports that it files or submits on Form N-CSR is accumulated and communicated to the Registrant's management, including its principal executive and principal financial officers, as appropriate to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosure.
(b) There were no changes to 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.
3 |
Item 12. Exhibits.
(a)(1) Not applicable.
(a)(2) Certifications of principal executive and principal financial officers as required by Rule 30a-2(a) under the Investment Company Act of 1940.
(a)(3) Not applicable.
(b) Certification of principal executive and principal financial officers as required by Rule 30a-2(b) under the Investment Company Act of 1940.
4 |
SIGNATURES
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.
Dreyfus New York AMT-Free Municipal Money Market Fund
By: /s/ Bradley J. Skapyak | |
Bradley J. Skapyak, President
| |
Date: | January 24, 2011 |
| |
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: /s/ Bradley J. Skapyak | |
Bradley J. Skapyak, President
| |
Date: | January 24, 2011 |
| |
By: /s/ James Windels | |
James Windels, Treasurer
| |
Date: | January 24, 2011 |
|
5 |
EXHIBIT INDEX
(a)(2) Certifications of principal executive and principal financial officers as required by Rule 30a-2(a) under the Investment Company Act of 1940. (EX-99.CERT)
(b) Certification of principal executive and principal financial officers as required by Rule 30a-2(b) under the Investment Company Act of 1940. (EX-99.906CERT)
6 |