Blackrock Muniyield Investment Quality Fund (MFT) N-CSR Certified annual shareholder report (management investment company)

Proxy Voting Policies

For The BlackRock-Advised Funds

May 30, 2008

Table of Contents
	Page
Introduction	1
Proxy Voting Policies	2
Boards of Directors	2
Auditors	2
Compensation and Benefits	2
Capital Structure	3
Corporate Charter and By-Laws	3
Corporate Meetings	3
Investment Companies	3
Environmental and Social Issues	3
Reports to the Board	4

Introduction

The Trustees/Directors (“Directors”) of the BlackRock-Advised Funds (the
“Funds”) have the responsibility for voting proxies relating to portfolio securities of the
Funds, and have determined that it is in the best interests of the Funds and their
shareholders to delegate that responsibility to BlackRock Advisors, LLC and its affiliated
U.S. registered investment advisers (“BlackRock”), the investment adviser to the Funds,
as part of BlackRock’s authority to manage, acquire and dispose of account assets. The
Directors hereby direct BlackRock to vote such proxies in accordance with this Policy,
and any proxy voting guidelines that the Adviser determines are appropriate and in the
best interests of the Funds’ shareholders and which are consistent with the principles
outlined in this Policy. The Directors have authorized BlackRock to utilize an
unaffiliated third-party as its agent to vote portfolio proxies in accordance with this
Policy and to maintain records of such portfolio proxy voting.

When BlackRock votes proxies for an advisory client that has delegated to
BlackRock proxy voting authority, BlackRock acts as the client’s agent. Under the
Investment Advisers Act of 1940 (the “Advisers Act”), an investment adviser is a
fiduciary that owes each of its clients a duty of care and loyalty with respect to all
services the adviser undertakes on the client’s behalf, including proxy voting. BlackRock
is therefore subject to a fiduciary duty to vote proxies in a manner BlackRock believes is
consistent with the client’s best interests.¹ When voting proxies for the Funds,
BlackRock’s primary objective is to make voting decisions solely in the best interests of
the Funds’ shareholders. In fulfilling its obligations to shareholders, BlackRock will seek
to act in a manner that it believes is most likely to enhance the economic value of the
underlying securities held in client accounts.² It is imperative that BlackRock considers
the interests of Fund shareholders, and not the interests of BlackRock, when voting
proxies and that real (or perceived) material conflicts that may arise between
BlackRock’s interest and those of BlackRock’s clients are properly addressed and
resolved.

Advisers Act Rule 206(4)-6 was adopted by the SEC in 2003 and requires, among
other things, that an investment adviser that exercises voting authority over clients’ proxy
voting adopt policies and procedures reasonably designed to ensure that the adviser votes
proxies in the best interests of clients, discloses to its clients information about those

¹ Letter from Harvey L. Pitt, Chairman, SEC, to John P.M. Higgins, President, Ram Trust Services
(February 12, 2002) (Section 206 of the Investment Advisers Act imposes a fiduciary responsibility to vote
proxies fairly and in the best interests of clients); SEC Release No. IA-2106 (February 3, 2003).

2 Other considerations, such as social, labor, environmental or other policies, may be of interest to
particular clients. While BlackRock is cognizant of the importance of such considerations, when voting
proxies it will generally take such matters into account only to the extent that they have a direct bearing on
the economic value of the underlying securities. To the extent that a BlackRock client, such as the Funds,
desires to pursue a particular social, labor, environmental or other agenda through the proxy votes made for
its securities held through BlackRock as investment adviser, BlackRock encourages the client to consider
retaining direct proxy voting authority or to appoint independently a special proxy voting fiduciary other
than BlackRock.

- 1 -

policies and procedures and also discloses to clients how they may obtain information on
how the adviser has voted their proxies.

BlackRock has adopted separate but substantially similar guidelines and
procedures that are consistent with the principles of this Policy. BlackRock’s Equity
Investment Policy Oversight Committee, or a sub-committee thereof (the “Committee”),
addresses proxy voting issues on behalf of BlackRock and its clients, including the
Funds. The Committee is comprised of senior members of BlackRock’s Portfolio
Management and Administration Groups and is advised by BlackRock’s Legal and
Compliance Department.

Proxy Voting Policies

A. Boards of Directors

These proposals concern those issues submitted to shareholders relating to the
composition of the board of directors of companies other than investment companies. As
a general matter, the Funds believe that a company’s board of directors (rather than
shareholders) is most likely to have access to important, nonpublic information regarding
a company’s business and prospects, and is therefore best-positioned to set corporate
policy and oversee management. The Funds therefore believe that the foundation of good
corporate governance is the election of qualified, independent corporate directors who are
likely to diligently represent the interests of shareholders and oversee management of the
corporation in a manner that will seek to maximize shareholder value over time. In
individual cases, consideration may be given to a director nominee’s history of
representing shareholder interests as a director of other companies, or other factors to the
extent deemed relevant by the Committee.

B. Auditors

These proposals concern those issues submitted to shareholders related to the
selection of auditors. As a general matter, the Funds believe that corporate auditors have
a responsibility to represent the interests of shareholders and provide an independent
view on the propriety of financial reporting decisions of corporate management. While
the Funds anticipate that the Committee will generally defer to a corporation’s choice of
auditor, in individual cases, consideration may be given to an auditors’ history of
representing shareholder interests as auditor of other companies, to the extent deemed
relevant.

C. Compensation and Benefits

These proposals concern those issues submitted to shareholders related to
management compensation and employee benefits. As a general matter, the Funds favor
disclosure of a company’s compensation and benefit policies and oppose excessive
compensation, but believe that compensation matters are normally best determined by a

- 2 -

corporation’s board of directors, rather than shareholders. Proposals to “micro-manage” a
company’s compensation practices or to set arbitrary restrictions on compensation or
benefits should therefore generally not be supported by the Committee.

D. Capital Structure

These proposals relate to various requests, principally from management, for
approval of amendments that would alter the capital structure of a company, such as an
increase in authorized shares. As a general matter, the Funds expect that the Committee
will support requests that it believes enhance the rights of common shareholders and
oppose requests that appear to be unreasonably dilutive.

E. Corporate Charter and By-Laws

These proposals relate to various requests for approval of amendments to a
corporation’s charter or by-laws, principally for the purpose of adopting or redeeming
“poison pills”. As a general matter, the Funds expect that the Committee will oppose
poison pill provisions unless, after consultation with the portfolio managers, it is
determined that supporting the poison pill is in the best interest of shareholders.

F. Corporate Meetings

These are routine proposals relating to various requests regarding the formalities
of corporate meetings. As a general matter, the Funds expect that the Committee will
support company management except where the proposals are substantially duplicative or
serve no legitimate business purpose.

G. Investment Companies

These proposals relate to proxy issues that are associated solely with holdings of
shares of investment companies, including, but not limited to, investment companies for
which BlackRock provides investment advisory, administrative and/or other services. As
with other types of companies, the Funds believe that an investment company’s board of
directors (rather than its shareholders) is best-positioned to set fund policy and oversee
management. However, the Funds oppose granting boards of directors authority over
certain matters, such as changes to a fund’s investment objective, that the Investment
Company Act of 1940 envisions will be approved directly by shareholders.

H. Environmental and Social Issues

These are shareholder proposals to limit corporate conduct in some manner that
relates to the shareholder’s environmental or social concerns. The Funds generally
believe that annual shareholder meetings are inappropriate forums for the discussion of
larger social issues, and oppose shareholder resolutions “micro-managing” corporate
conduct or requesting release of information that would not help a shareholder evaluate

- 3 -

an investment in the corporation as an economic matter. While the Funds are generally
supportive of proposals to require corporate disclosure of matters that seem relevant and
material to the economic interests of shareholders, the Funds generally are not supportive
of proposals to require disclosure of corporate matters for other purposes.

Reports to the Board

BlackRock will report to the Directors on proxy votes it has made on behalf of the Funds
at least annually.

- 4 -