BLACKROCK FUNDS III

This combined Statement of Additional Information (“SAI”) of BlackRock Funds III (the “Trust”) is not a prospectus and should be read in conjunction with the current prospectus of the Trust dated April 28, 2023, as it may from time to time be supplemented or revised, for SL Agency Shares of BlackRock Cash Funds: Institutional and BlackRock Cash Funds: Treasury (each, a “Fund” and collectively, the “Funds”). No investment in shares should be made without reading the prospectus. All terms used in this SAI that are defined in the prospectus have the meanings assigned in the prospectus. This SAI is incorporated by reference in its entirety into the prospectus for SL Agency Shares. Copies of the prospectus and Annual Report and Semi-Annual Report for each of the Funds may be obtained, without charge, by writing to State Street Bank and Trust Company, Attn: Quincy Nunnally-Transfer Agency, P.O. Box 5493, Boston, Massachusetts 02206, or by calling 1-888-204-3956 (toll free). The audited financial statements of each of the Funds are incorporated into this SAI by reference to the Funds’ Annual Report to Shareholders for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2022 (the “Annual Report”).

References to the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended (the “1940 Act”), or other applicable law, will include any rules promulgated thereunder and any guidance, interpretations or modifications by the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”), SEC staff or other authority with appropriate jurisdiction, including court interpretations, and exemptive, no-action or other relief or permission from the SEC, SEC staff or other authority.

The Trust is an open-end, series management investment company. The Funds have additional share classes which are described in separate prospectuses and a separate SAI. Each Fund seeks to achieve its investment objective by investing all of its assets in a master portfolio of Master Investment Portfolio (“MIP”). BlackRock Cash Funds: Institutional invests in Money Market Master Portfolio and BlackRock Cash Funds: Treasury invests in Treasury Money Market Master Portfolio (each, a “Master Portfolio” and collectively, the “Master Portfolios”). MIP is an open-end, series management investment company. BlackRock Fund Advisors (“BFA,” the “Manager” or the “Investment Adviser”) serves as investment adviser to each Master Portfolio. References to the investments, investment policies and risks of a Fund, unless otherwise indicated, should be understood to include references to the investments, investment policies and risks of such Fund’s Master Portfolio.

BlackRock Funds III (the “Trust”) was organized on December 4, 2001 as a statutory trust under the laws of the State of Delaware under the name Barclays Global Investors Funds. The Trust was originally organized as a Maryland corporation named Barclays Global Investors Funds, Inc. (the “Maryland corporation”). On August 21, 2001, the Board of Directors of the Maryland corporation approved a proposal to redomicile the Maryland corporation in Delaware as a Delaware statutory trust (the “Redomiciling”). Shareholders of the Maryland corporation approved the Redomiciling on November 16, 2001. The Trust was established with multiple series corresponding to, and having identical designations as, the series of the Maryland corporation. The Redomiciling was effected on January 11, 2002, at which time the Trust assumed the operations of the Maryland corporation and adopted the Maryland corporation’s registration statement. Shortly thereafter, the Maryland corporation was dissolved.

On December 1, 2009, the Trust was renamed BlackRock Funds III and certain of its series were also renamed. Institutional Money Market Fund was renamed BlackRock Cash Funds: Institutional. Treasury Money Market Fund was renamed BlackRock Cash Funds: Treasury.

The Trust consists of multiple series, including BlackRock Cash Funds: Institutional and BlackRock Cash Funds: Treasury (each, a “Fund” and collectively, the “Funds”). BlackRock Cash Funds: Treasury issues shares in multiple classes, currently including SL Agency, Premium, Capital, Institutional, Select and Trust Shares. BlackRock Cash Funds: Institutional currently issues only SL Agency Shares. SL Agency Shares are discussed in this Statement of Additional Information. Premium, Capital, Institutional, Select and Trust Shares are discussed in a separate Statement of Additional Information.

Each Fund invests all of its assets in a master portfolio (each, a “Master Portfolio” and collectively, the “Master Portfolios”) of Master Investment Portfolio (“MIP”) (as shown below), which has substantially the same investment objective, policies and restrictions as the related Fund.

The Trust’s principal office is located at 400 Howard Street, San Francisco, California 94105.

Investment Objectives and Policies. The Trust is an open-end, series management investment company.

BlackRock Cash Funds: Institutional is a non-retail, non-government money market fund under Rule 2a-7 under the 1940 Act (the “Institutional Fund”). Money Market Master Portfolio is a non-retail, non-government money market fund under Rule 2a-7. Each of BlackRock Cash Funds: Treasury and Treasury Money Market Master Portfolio is a government money market fund under Rule 2a-7.

The Funds and the Master Portfolios in which they invest are diversified funds as defined in the 1940 Act. Each Fund’s investment objective is set forth in the Prospectus. Each Fund’s investment objective is non-fundamental and can be changed by the Trust’s Board of Trustees (the “Board of Trustees” or the “Board”) without shareholder approval. The investment objective and investment policies of a Fund determine the types of portfolio securities in which the Fund invests, the degree of risk to which the Fund is subject and, ultimately, the Fund’s performance. There can be no assurance that the investment objective of any Fund will be achieved.

Master/Feeder Structure. Each Fund seeks to achieve its investment objective by investing all of its assets in the corresponding Master Portfolio of MIP. The Board of Trustees believes that under normal circumstances, none of the Funds or their shareholders will be adversely affected by investing Fund assets in a Master Portfolio. However, if a mutual fund or other investor redeems its interests from a Master Portfolio, the economic efficiencies (e.g., spreading fixed expenses over a larger asset base) that the Board of Trustees believes may be

available through a Fund’s investment in such Master Portfolio may not be fully achieved. In addition, although unlikely, the master/feeder structure may give rise to accounting or operational difficulties.

The fundamental policies of each Master Portfolio cannot be changed without approval by the holders of a majority (as defined in the 1940 Act) of a Master Portfolio’s outstanding interests. Whenever a Fund, as an interestholder of a Master Portfolio, is requested to vote on any matter submitted to interestholders of the Master Portfolio, a Fund will either hold a meeting of its shareholders to consider such matters and cast its votes in proportion to the votes received from its shareholders (shares for which a Fund receives no voting instructions will be voted in the same proportion as the votes received from the other Fund shareholders) or cast its votes, as an interestholder of the Master Portfolio, in proportion to the votes received by the Master Portfolio from all other interestholders of the Master Portfolio.

Certain policies of the Master Portfolios that are non-fundamental may be changed by vote of a majority of MIP’s Trustees without interestholder approval. If a Master Portfolio’s investment objective or fundamental or non-fundamental policies are changed, a Fund may elect to change its objective or policies to correspond to those of the related Master Portfolio. Each Fund may redeem its interests from its Master Portfolio only if the Board of Trustees determines that such action is in the best interests of the Fund and its shareholders, for this or any other reason. Prior to such redemption, the Board of Trustees would consider alternatives, including whether to seek a new investment company with a matching investment objective in which to invest or retain its own investment adviser to manage the Fund’s portfolio in accordance with its investment objective. In the latter case, a Fund’s inability to find a substitute investment company in which to invest or equivalent management services could adversely affect shareholders’ investments in the Fund.

Fundamental Investment Restrictions of the Funds. The Funds are subject to the following investment restrictions, all of which are fundamental policies. Each Fund may not:

(1) Purchase the securities of issuers conducting their principal business activity in the same industry if, immediately after the purchase and as a result thereof, the value of the Fund’s investments in that industry would equal or exceed 25% of the current value of the Fund’s total assets, provided that this restriction does not limit the Fund’s: (i) investments in securities of other investment companies, (ii) investments in securities issued or guaranteed by the U.S. Government, its agencies or instrumentalities, or (iii) investments in repurchase agreements collateralized by U.S. Government securities; and further provided that, with respect to BlackRock Cash Funds: Institutional, the Fund reserves the right to concentrate in the obligations of domestic banks (as such term is interpreted by the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) or its staff);

(2) Purchase the securities of any single issuer if, as a result, with respect to 75% of the Fund’s total assets, more than 5% of the value of its total assets would be invested in the securities of such issuer or the Fund’s ownership would be more than 10% of the outstanding voting securities of such issuer, provided that this restriction does not limit the Fund’s cash or cash items, investments in U.S. Government securities, or investments in securities of other investment companies;

(3) Borrow money or issue senior securities, except to the extent permitted under the 1940 Act, including the rules, regulations and any orders obtained thereunder;

(4) Make loans to other parties, except to the extent permitted under the 1940 Act, including the rules, regulations and any orders obtained thereunder. For the purposes of this limitation, entering into repurchase agreements, lending securities and acquiring any debt securities are not deemed to be the making of loans;

(5) Underwrite securities of other issuers, except to the extent that the purchase of permitted investments directly from the issuer thereof or from an underwriter for an issuer and the later disposition of such securities in accordance with the Fund’s investment program may be deemed to be an underwriting; and provided further, that the purchase by the Fund of securities issued by an open-end management investment company, or a series thereof, with substantially the same investment objective, policies and restrictions as the Fund shall not constitute an underwriting for purposes of this paragraph;

(6) Purchase or sell real estate unless acquired as a result of ownership of securities or other instruments (but this shall not prevent the Fund from investing in securities or other instruments backed by real estate or securities of companies engaged in the real estate business); and

(7) Purchase or sell commodities, provided that: (i) currency will not be deemed to be a commodity for purposes of this restriction, (ii) this restriction does not limit the purchase or sale of futures contracts, forward contracts or options, and (iii) this restriction does not limit the purchase or sale of securities or other instruments backed by commodities or the purchase or sale of commodities acquired as a result of ownership of securities or other instruments.

With respect to the fundamental policy relating to concentration set forth in paragraph (1) above, the 1940 Act does not define what constitutes “concentration” in an industry and it is possible that interpretations of concentration could change in the future. Accordingly, the policy in paragraph (1) above will be interpreted to refer to concentration as that term may be interpreted from time to time. In this respect, and in accordance with SEC staff interpretations, the ability of BlackRock Cash Funds: Institutional to concentrate in the obligations of domestic banks means that this Fund is permitted to invest, without limit, in bankers’ acceptances, certificates of deposit and other short-term obligations issued by (a) U.S. banks, (b) U.S. branches of foreign banks (in circumstances in which the U.S. branches of foreign banks are subject to the same regulation as U.S. banks), and (c) foreign branches of U.S. banks (in circumstances in which the Fund will have recourse to the U.S. bank for the obligations of the foreign branch). A Fund may invest in other investment companies that may concentrate their assets in one or more industries. A Fund may consider the concentration of such other investment companies in determining compliance with the Fund’s concentration policy.

The Trust has delegated to BFA, an affiliate of BlackRock, Inc. (together with its affiliates, “BlackRock”), the ability to determine the methodology used by the Master Portfolios to classify issuers by industry. BFA defines industries and classifies each issuer according to the industry in which the issuer conducts its principal business activity pursuant to its proprietary industry classification system. In classifying companies by industry, BFA may draw on its credit, research and investment resources and those of BlackRock Institutional Trust Company, N.A. (“BTC”) or its other affiliates, and BFA may (but need not) consider classifications by third-party industry classification systems. BFA believes that its system is reasonably designed so that issuers with primary economic characteristics that are materially the same are classified in the same industry. For example, asset-backed commercial paper may be classified in an industry based on the nature of the assets backing the commercial paper, and foreign banks may be classified in an industry based on the region in which they do business if BFA has determined that the foreign banks within that industry have primary economic characteristics that are materially the same.

A fund that invests a significant percentage of its total assets in a single industry may be particularly susceptible to adverse events affecting that industry and may be more risky than a fund that does not concentrate in an industry. To the extent BFA’s classification system results in broad categories, concentration risk may be decreased. On the other hand, to the extent it results in narrow categories, concentration risk may be increased.

With respect to paragraph (3) above, the 1940 Act currently allows each Fund to borrow up to one-third of the value of its total assets (including the amount borrowed) valued at the lesser of cost or market, less liabilities (not including the amount borrowed) at the time the borrowing is made. In addition, each Fund has received an exemptive order from the SEC permitting it to borrow through the Interfund Lending Program (discussed below), subject to the conditions of the exemptive order. With respect to paragraph (4) above, the 1940 Act and regulatory interpretations currently limit the percentage of each Fund’s securities that may be loaned to one-third of the value of its total assets.

BlackRock Cash Fund: Treasury has adopted the following investment restrictions as non-fundamental policies. These restrictions may be changed without shareholder approval by a majority of the Trustees of the Trust at any time.

(1) The Fund may invest in shares of other open-end management investment companies, subject to the limitations of Section 12(d)(1) of the 1940 Act, including the rules, regulations and exemptive orders obtained thereunder.

(2) The Fund may not invest more than 5% of its net assets in illiquid securities. For this purpose, illiquid securities include, among others, (i) securities that are illiquid by virtue of the absence of a readily available market or legal or contractual restrictions on resale, (ii) fixed time deposits that are subject to withdrawal penalties and that have maturities of more than seven days, and (iii) repurchase agreements not terminable within seven days.

(3) The Fund may lend securities from its portfolio to brokers, dealers and financial institutions, in amounts not to exceed (in the aggregate) one-third of the Fund’s total assets. Any such loans of portfolio securities will be fully collateralized based on values that are marked-to-market daily.

(4) The Fund may not make investments for the purpose of exercising control or management; provided that the Fund may invest all of its assets in a diversified, open-end management investment company, or a series thereof, with substantially the same investment objective, policies and restrictions as the Fund, without regard to the limitations set forth in this paragraph.

(5) The Fund invests at least 99.5% of its total assets in cash, U.S. Treasury bills, notes and other direct obligations of the U.S. Treasury, and repurchase agreements secured by such obligations or cash.

(6) The Fund will invest, under normal circumstances, at least 80% of its net assets, plus the amount of any borrowings for investment purposes, in U.S. Treasury bills, notes and other obligations of the U.S. Treasury, and repurchase agreements secured by such obligations. This policy will not be changed without providing shareholders with at least 60 days’ prior notice of any change in the policy.

BlackRock Cash Funds: Institutional has adopted the following investment restrictions as non-fundamental policies. These restrictions may be changed without shareholder approval by a majority of the Trustees of the Trust at any time.

(1) The Fund may not purchase securities of other investment companies, except to the extent permitted by the 1940 Act. As a matter of policy, however, the Fund will not purchase shares of any registered open-end investment company or registered unit investment trust, in reliance on Section 12(d)(1)(F) or (G) (the “fund of funds” provisions) of the 1940 Act, at any time the Fund has knowledge that its shares are purchased by another investment company investor in reliance on the provisions of subparagraph (G) of Section 12(d)(1).

(2) The Fund may not purchase securities on margin (except for short-term credits necessary for the clearance of transactions) or make short sales of securities.

Notwithstanding any other investment policy or restriction (whether or not fundamental), each Fund may (and does) invest all of its assets in the securities of a single open-end management investment company with substantially the same fundamental investment objective, policies and limitations as the Fund.

The fundamental and non-fundamental investment restrictions for each Master Portfolio are identical to the corresponding investment restrictions described above for the Fund that invests in such Master Portfolio, except that, in the case of Treasury Money Market Master Portfolio, industry concentration restriction (1), proviso (iii) does not limit investments in repurchase agreements collateralized by securities issued or guaranteed by the U.S. Government, its agencies or instrumentalities.

To the extent set forth in this SAI, each Fund, through its investment in the corresponding Master Portfolio, may invest in the securities described below. To avoid the need to refer to both the Funds and the Master Portfolios in every instance, the following sections generally refer to the Funds only.

The assets of each Fund consist only of obligations maturing within 397 calendar days from the date of acquisition (as determined in accordance with the regulations of the SEC). The dollar-weighted average maturity of a Fund may not exceed 60 days and the dollar-weighted average life of a Fund may not exceed 120 days. The securities in which each Fund invests may not yield as high a level of current income as may be achieved from securities with less liquidity and less safety. There can be no assurance that a Fund’s investment objective will be realized as described in the Prospectus.

BlackRock Cash Funds: Treasury invests at least 99.5% of its total assets in cash, U.S. Treasury bills, notes and other direct obligations of the U.S. Treasury, and repurchase agreements secured by such obligations or cash. Practices described below relating to illiquid securities, investment company securities, loans of portfolio securities and repurchase agreements also apply to BlackRock Cash Funds: Treasury.

BlackRock Cash Funds: Institutional may invest in any of the instruments or engage in any practice described below.

Asset-Backed and Commercial Mortgage-Backed Securities. BlackRock Cash Funds: Institutional may invest in asset-backed and commercial mortgage-backed securities. Asset-backed securities are securities backed by installment contracts, credit-card receivables or other assets. Commercial mortgage-backed securities are securities backed by commercial real estate properties. Both asset-backed and commercial mortgage-backed securities represent interests in “pools” of assets in which payments of both interest and principal on the securities are made on a regular basis. The payments are, in effect, “passed through” to the holder of the securities (net of any fees paid to the issuer or guarantor of the securities). The average life of asset-backed and commercial mortgage-backed securities varies with the maturities of the underlying instruments and, as a result of prepayments, can often be shorter or longer (as the case may be) than the original maturity of the assets underlying the securities. For this and other reasons, an asset-backed and commercial mortgage-backed security’s stated maturity may be shortened or extended, and the security’s total return may be difficult to predict precisely. The Fund may invest in such securities up to the limits prescribed by Rule 2a-7 and other provisions of or under the 1940 Act. Changes in liquidity of these securities may result in significant, rapid and unpredictable changes in prices for credit-linked securities. Also see “Mortgage Pass-Through Securities” and “Mortgage Securities.”

Bank Obligations. BlackRock Cash Funds: Institutional may invest in bank obligations, including certificates of deposit (“CDs”), time deposits, bankers’ acceptances and other short-term obligations of domestic and foreign banks, foreign subsidiaries of domestic banks, foreign branches of domestic banks, foreign branches of foreign banks, and domestic branches of foreign banks, domestic savings and loan associations and other banking institutions. Certain bank obligations may benefit from existing or future governmental debt guarantee programs.

CDs are negotiable certificates evidencing the obligation of a bank to repay funds deposited with it for a specified period of time.

Time deposits (“TDs”) are non-negotiable deposits maintained in a banking institution for a specified period of time at a stated interest rate. TDs that may be held by the Fund will not benefit from insurance from the Bank Insurance Fund or the Savings Association Insurance Fund administered by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (“FDIC”).

Bankers’ acceptances are credit instruments evidencing the obligation of a bank to pay a draft drawn on it by a customer. These instruments reflect the obligation both of the bank and of the drawer to pay the face amount of the instrument upon maturity. The other short-term obligations may include uninsured, direct obligations bearing fixed-, floating- or variable-interest rates.

Domestic commercial banks organized under federal law are supervised and examined by the Comptroller of the Currency and are required to be members of the Federal Reserve System and to have their deposits insured by the FDIC. Domestic banks organized under state law are supervised and examined by state banking authorities and are members of the Federal Reserve System only if they elect to join. In addition, state banks whose CDs may be purchased by the Fund are insured by the FDIC (although such insurance may not be of

material benefit to the Fund, depending on the principal amount of the CDs of each bank held by the Fund) and are subject to federal examination and to a substantial body of federal law and regulation. As a result of federal or state laws and regulations, domestic branches of domestic banks whose CDs may be purchased by the Fund generally are required, among other things, to maintain specified levels of reserves, are limited in the amounts that they can loan to a single borrower and are subject to other regulations designed to promote financial soundness. However, not all of such laws and regulations apply to the foreign branches of domestic banks.

Obligations of foreign branches of domestic banks, foreign subsidiaries of domestic banks and domestic and foreign branches of foreign banks, such as CDs and TDs, may be general obligations of the parent banks in addition to the issuing branch, or may be limited by the terms of a specific obligation and/or governmental regulation. Such obligations are subject to different risks than are those of domestic banks. These risks include foreign economic and political developments, foreign governmental restrictions that may adversely affect payment of principal and interest on the obligations, foreign exchange controls and foreign withholding and other taxes on amounts realized on the obligations. These foreign branches and subsidiaries are not necessarily subject to the same or similar regulatory requirements that apply to domestic banks, such as mandatory reserve requirements, loan limitations, and accounting, auditing and financial record keeping requirements. In addition, less information may be publicly available about a foreign branch of a domestic bank or about a foreign bank than about a domestic bank.

Obligations of U.S. branches of foreign banks may be general obligations of the parent bank in addition to the issuing branch, or may be limited by the terms of a specific obligation or by federal or state regulation, as well as governmental action in the country in which the foreign bank has its head office. A domestic branch of a foreign bank with assets in excess of $1 billion may be subject to reserve requirements imposed by the Federal Reserve System or by the state in which the branch is located if the branch is licensed in that state.

In addition, federal branches licensed by the Comptroller of the Currency and branches licensed by certain states may be required to: (1) pledge to the appropriate regulatory authority, by depositing assets with a designated bank within the relevant state, a certain percentage of their assets as fixed from time to time by such regulatory authority; and (2) maintain assets within the relevant state in an amount equal to a specified percentage of the aggregate amount of liabilities of the foreign bank payable at or through all of its agencies or branches within the state.

Commercial Paper and Short-Term Corporate Debt Instruments. The Funds may invest in commercial paper (including variable amount master demand notes), which consists of short-term, unsecured promissory notes issued by corporations to finance short-term credit needs. Commercial paper is usually sold on a discount basis and usually has a maturity at the time of issuance not exceeding nine months. Variable amount master demand notes are demand obligations that permit a Fund to invest fluctuating amounts, which may change daily without penalty, pursuant to direct arrangements between a Fund, as lender, and the borrower. The interest on these notes varies pursuant to the arrangements between the Fund and the borrower. Both the borrower and the Fund have the right to vary the amount of the outstanding indebtedness on the notes. BFA monitors on an ongoing basis the ability of an issuer of a demand instrument to pay principal and interest on demand.

The Funds also may invest in non-convertible corporate debt securities (e.g., bonds and debentures) with not more than thirteen months remaining to maturity at the date of settlement. A Fund will invest only in such corporate bonds and debentures that are deemed appropriate by BFA in accordance with Rule 2a-7 under the 1940 Act. Subsequent to its purchase by a Fund, an issue of securities may cease to be rated or its rating may be reduced. BFA will consider such an event in determining whether the Fund should continue to hold the obligation. To the extent the Fund continues to hold the obligation, it may be subject to additional risk of default.

Asset-Backed Commercial Paper. A Fund may also invest in asset-backed commercial paper. Asset-backed commercial paper is a type of securitized commercial paper product used to fund purchases of financial assets by special purpose finance companies called conduits. The financial assets may include assets such as pools of

trade receivables, car loans and leases, and credit card receivables, among others. Asset-backed commercial paper is typically tracked and rated by one or more credit rating agencies. Some asset-backed commercial paper programs maintain a back-up liquidity facility provided by a major bank, which is intended to be used if the issuer is unable to issue new asset-backed commercial paper.

Environmental, Social and Governance (“ESG”) Integration. Although BlackRock Cash Funds: Institutional does not seek to implement a specific sustainability strategy unless disclosed in the Fund’s prospectus, BlackRock will consider ESG characteristics in the credit research and investment process for BlackRock Cash Funds: Institutional. All securities purchases by BlackRock Cash Funds: Institutional are selected from approved lists maintained by BlackRock. All instruments on an approved list used by BlackRock Cash Funds: Institutional have met the minimal credit risk requirement of Rule 2a-7, if required. In reviewing instruments, BlackRock will consider the capacity of the issuer or guarantor to meet its obligations. BlackRock considers ESG data within the total data available during its review. This may include third party research as well as considerations of proprietary BlackRock research across environmental, social and governance risk and opportunities regarding an issuer.

ESG characteristics are not the sole consideration when making investment decisions for BlackRock Cash Funds: Institutional. BlackRock Cash Funds: Institutional may invest in issuers that do not reflect the beliefs or values with respect to ESG of any particular investor. BlackRock will consider those ESG characteristics it deems relevant or additive when making investment decisions for BlackRock Cash Funds: Institutional. The ESG characteristics utilized in BlackRock Cash Funds: Institutional’s investment processes may evolve over time and one or more characteristics may not be relevant with respect to all issuers that are eligible for investment. While BlackRock views ESG considerations as having the potential to contribute to BlackRock Cash Funds: Institutional’s long-term performance, there is no guarantee that such results will be achieved.

BlackRock Cash Funds: Institutional may incorporate certain specific sustainability considerations into its investment objective, strategies and/or processes, as described in BlackRock Cash Funds: Institutional’s prospectus.

Floating-Rate and Variable-Rate Obligations. The Funds may purchase debt instruments with interest rates that are periodically adjusted at specified intervals or whenever a benchmark rate or index changes. The floating-rate and variable-rate instruments that the Funds may purchase include certificates of participation in such instruments. The interest rate adjustments generally limit the increase or decrease in the amount of interest received on the debt instruments. Floating-rate and variable-rate instruments are subject to interest rate risk and credit risk.

The Funds may purchase floating-rate and variable-rate demand notes and bonds, which are obligations ordinarily having stated maturities in excess of thirteen months, but which permit the holder to demand payment of principal at any time, or at specified intervals not exceeding 397 days, as defined in accordance with Rule 2a-7 and the 1940 Act. Variable-rate demand notes including master demand notes are demand obligations that permit a Fund to invest fluctuating amounts, which may change daily without penalty, pursuant to direct arrangements between a Fund, as lender, and the borrower. The interest rates on these notes fluctuate from time to time. The issuer of such obligations ordinarily has a corresponding right, after a given period, to prepay in its discretion the outstanding principal amount of the obligations plus accrued interest upon a specified number of days’ notice to the holders of such obligations. The interest rate on a floating-rate demand obligation is based on a known lending rate, such as a bank’s prime rate, and is adjusted automatically each time such rate is adjusted. The interest rate on a variable-rate demand obligation is adjusted automatically at specified intervals. Frequently, such obligations are secured by letters of credit or other credit support arrangements provided by banks.

These obligations are direct lending arrangements between the lender and borrower. There may not be an established secondary market for these obligations, although they are redeemable at face value. Accordingly, where these obligations are not secured by letters of credit or other credit support arrangements, a Fund’s right to redeem is dependent on the ability of the borrower to pay principal and interest on demand. Such

obligations frequently are not rated by credit rating agencies. BFA considers on an ongoing basis the creditworthiness of the issuers of the floating-rate and variable-rate demand obligations in a Fund’s portfolio.

Forward Commitments, When-Issued Purchases and Delayed-Delivery Transactions. A Fund may purchase or sell securities that it is entitled to receive on a when issued basis. A Fund may also purchase or sell securities on a delayed delivery basis or through a forward commitment (including on a “TBA” (to be announced) basis). These transactions involve the purchase or sale of securities by a Fund at an established price with payment and delivery taking place in the future. The Fund enters into these transactions to obtain what is considered an advantageous price to the Fund at the time of entering into the transaction.

Pursuant to recommendations of the Treasury Market Practices Group, which is sponsored by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, a Fund or its counterparty generally will be required to post collateral when entering into certain forward-settling transactions, including without limitation TBA transactions.

There can be no assurance that a security purchased on a when issued basis will be issued or that a security purchased or sold on a delayed delivery basis or through a forward commitment will be delivered. Also, the value of securities in these transactions on the delivery date may be more or less than the price paid by the Fund to purchase the securities. The Fund will lose money if the value of the security in such a transaction declines below the purchase price and will not benefit if the value of the security appreciates above the sale price during the commitment period.

If deemed advisable as a matter of investment strategy, a Fund may dispose of or renegotiate a commitment after it has been entered into, and may sell securities it has committed to purchase before those securities are delivered to the Fund on the settlement date. In these cases the Fund may realize a taxable capital gain or loss.

When a Fund engages in when-issued, TBA or forward commitment transactions, it relies on the other party to consummate the trade. Failure of such party to do so may result in the Fund’s incurring a loss or missing an opportunity to obtain a price considered to be advantageous.

The market value of the securities underlying a commitment to purchase securities, and any subsequent fluctuations in their market value, is taken into account when determining the market value of a Fund starting on the day the Fund agrees to purchase the securities. The Fund does not earn interest on the securities it has committed to purchase until they are paid for and delivered on the settlement date.

Regulations adopted by global prudential regulators that are now in effect require certain bank-regulated counterparties and certain of their affiliates to include in certain financial contracts, including many agreements with respect to when-issued, TBA and forward commitment transactions, terms that delay or restrict the rights of counterparties, such as a Fund, to terminate such agreements, foreclose upon collateral, exercise other default rights or restrict transfers of credit support in the event that the counterparty and/or its affiliates are subject to certain types of resolution or insolvency proceedings. It is possible that these new requirements, as well as potential additional government regulation and other developments in the market, could adversely affect a Fund’s ability to terminate existing agreements with respect to these transactions or to realize amounts to be received under such agreements.

Funding Agreements. The Funds may invest in short-term funding agreements. A funding agreement is a contract between an issuer and a purchaser that obligates the issuer to pay a guaranteed rate of interest on a principal sum deposited by the purchaser. Funding agreements will also guarantee the return of principal and may guarantee a stream of payments over time. A funding agreement has a fixed maturity and may have either a fixed-, variable- or floating-interest rate that is based on an index and guaranteed for a fixed time period. The Funds will purchase short-term funding agreements only from banks and insurance companies. The Funds may also purchase Guaranteed Investment Contracts.

The secondary market, if any, for these funding agreements is limited; thus, such investments purchased by the Funds may be treated as illiquid. If a funding agreement is determined to be illiquid it will be valued by the Institutional Fund at its fair market value as determined by procedures approved by the Board of Trustees.

Valuation of illiquid indebtedness involves a greater degree of judgment in determining the value of the Institutional Fund’s assets than if the value were based on available market quotations.

Illiquid Securities. Each Fund may invest in securities as to which a liquid trading market does not exist, provided such investments are consistent with its investment objective. Such securities may include securities that are not readily marketable, such as privately issued securities and other securities that are subject to legal or contractual restrictions on resale, floating-rate and variable-rate demand obligations as to which the Fund cannot exercise a demand feature on not more than seven days’ notice and as to which there is no secondary market, and repurchase agreements providing for settlement more than seven days after notice.

Interfund Lending Program. Pursuant to an exemptive order granted by the SEC (the “IFL Order”), an open-end BlackRock fund (referred to as a “BlackRock fund” in this subsection), including a Fund, to the extent permitted by its investment policies and restrictions and subject to meeting the conditions of the IFL Order, has the ability to lend money to, and borrow money from, other BlackRock funds pursuant to a master interfund lending agreement (the “Interfund Lending Program”). Under the Interfund Lending Program, BlackRock funds may lend or borrow money for temporary purposes directly to or from other BlackRock funds (an “Interfund Loan”). All Interfund Loans would consist only of uninvested cash reserves that the lending BlackRock fund otherwise would invest in short-term repurchase agreements or other short-term instruments. Although the Funds may, to the extent permitted by their investment policies, participate in the Interfund Lending Program as borrowers or lenders, they typically will not need to participate as borrowers because the Funds are money market funds and are required to comply with the liquidity provisions of Rule 2a-7 under the 1940 Act.

If a BlackRock fund has outstanding bank borrowings, any Interfund Loans to such BlackRock fund would: (a) be at an interest rate equal to or lower than that of any outstanding bank loan, (b) be secured at least on an equal priority basis with at least an equivalent percentage of collateral to loan value as any outstanding bank loan that requires collateral, (c) have a maturity no longer than any outstanding bank loan (and in any event not over seven days), and (d) provide that, if an event of default occurs under any agreement evidencing an outstanding bank loan to the BlackRock fund, that event of default will automatically (without need for action or notice by the lending BlackRock fund) constitute an immediate event of default under the interfund lending agreement, entitling the lending BlackRock fund to call the Interfund Loan immediately (and exercise all rights with respect to any collateral), and cause such call to be made if the lending bank exercises its right to call its loan under its agreement with the borrowing BlackRock fund.

A BlackRock fund may borrow on an unsecured basis through the Interfund Lending Program only if its outstanding borrowings from all sources immediately after the borrowing total 10% or less of its total assets, provided that if the BlackRock fund has a secured loan outstanding from any other lender, including but not limited to another BlackRock fund, the borrowing BlackRock fund’s borrowing will be secured on at least an equal priority basis with at least an equivalent percentage of collateral to loan value as any outstanding loan that requires collateral. If a borrowing BlackRock fund’s total outstanding borrowings immediately after an Interfund Loan under the Interfund Lending Program exceed 10% of its total assets, the BlackRock fund may borrow through the Interfund Lending Program on a secured basis only. A BlackRock fund may not borrow under the Interfund Lending Program or from any other source if its total outstanding borrowings immediately after the borrowing would be more than 33 1/3% of its total assets or any lower threshold provided for by the BlackRock fund’s investment restrictions.

No BlackRock fund may lend to another BlackRock fund through the Interfund Lending Program if the loan would cause the lending BlackRock fund’s aggregate outstanding loans through the Interfund Lending Program to exceed 15% of its current net assets at the time of the loan. A BlackRock fund’s Interfund Loans to any one BlackRock fund shall not exceed 5% of the lending BlackRock fund’s net assets. The duration of Interfund Loans will be limited to the time required to receive payment for securities sold, but in no event more than seven days, and for purposes of this condition, loans effected within seven days of each other will be treated as separate loan transactions. Each Interfund Loan may be called on one business day’s notice by a lending BlackRock fund and may be repaid on any day by a borrowing BlackRock fund.

The limitations described above and the other conditions of the IFL Order permitting interfund lending are designed to minimize the risks associated with interfund lending for both the lending BlackRock fund and the borrowing BlackRock fund. However, no borrowing or lending activity is without risk. When a BlackRock fund borrows money from another BlackRock fund under the Interfund Lending Program, there is a risk that the Interfund Loan could be called on one day’s notice, in which case the borrowing BlackRock fund may have to seek to borrow from a bank, which would likely involve higher rates, seek an Interfund Loan from another BlackRock fund, or liquidate portfolio securities if no lending sources are available to meet its liquidity needs. Interfund Loans are subject to the risk that the borrowing BlackRock fund could be unable to repay the loan when due, and a delay in repayment could result in a lost opportunity by the lending BlackRock fund or force the lending BlackRock fund to borrow or liquidate securities to meet its liquidity needs. No BlackRock fund may borrow more than the amount permitted by its investment restrictions. There can be no assurance that an interfund loan will be available to a borrowing or lending BlackRock fund.

Investment Company Securities. Each Fund may invest in shares of open-end investment companies, including investment companies that are affiliated with the Funds and BFA, that invest exclusively in high-quality short-term securities to the extent permitted under the 1940 Act, including the rules, regulations and exemptive orders obtained thereunder; provided, however, that BlackRock Cash Funds: Treasury may only invest in shares of other investment companies that are money market funds; and provided further, however, that a Fund, if it has knowledge that its beneficial interests are purchased by another investment company investor pursuant to Section 12(d)(1)(G) of the 1940 Act, will not acquire any securities of registered open-end management investment companies or registered unit investment trusts in reliance on Section 12(d)(1)(F) or 12(d)(1)(G) of the 1940 Act. Other investment companies in which a Fund invests can be expected to charge fees for operating expenses, such as investment advisory and administration fees, that would be in addition to those charged by the Fund. BlackRock Cash Funds: Institutional may also purchase shares of exchange listed closed-end funds to the extent permitted under the 1940 Act. Under the 1940 Act, a Fund’s investment in investment companies is limited to, subject to certain exceptions, (i) 3% of the total outstanding voting stock of any one investment company, (ii) 5% of the Fund’s total assets with respect to any one investment company, and (iii) 10% of the Fund’s total assets with respect to investment companies in the aggregate. To the extent allowed by law or regulation, each Fund may invest its assets in securities of investment companies that are money market funds, including those advised by BFA or otherwise affiliated with BFA, in excess of the limits discussed above.

Letters of Credit. Certain of the debt obligations (including municipal securities, certificates of participation, commercial paper and other short-term obligations) that the Funds may purchase may be backed by an unconditional and irrevocable letter of credit issued by a bank, savings and loan association or insurance company that assumes the obligation for payment of principal and interest in the event of default by the issuer. Only banks, savings and loan associations and insurance companies that, in the opinion of BFA, are of comparable quality to issuers of other permitted investments of the Funds may be used for letter of credit-backed investments.

LIBOR Risk. The Funds may be exposed to financial instruments that are tied to the London Interbank Offered Rate (“LIBOR”).

The United Kingdom’s Financial Conduct Authority announced a phase out of LIBOR such that after June 30, 2023, the overnight, 1-month, 3-month, 6-month and 12-month U.S. dollar LIBOR settings will cease to be published or will no longer be representative. All other LIBOR settings and certain other interbank offered rates, such as the Euro Overnight Index Average (“EONIA”), ceased to be published or representative after December 31, 2021. The Secured Overnight Financing Rate (“SOFR”), is a broad measure of the cost of borrowing cash overnight collateralized by U.S. Treasury securities in the repurchase agreement (“repo”) market and has been used increasingly on a voluntary basis in new instruments and transactions. On December 16, 2022, the Federal Reserve Board adopted regulations implementing the Adjustable Interest Rate Act, which provides a statutory fallback mechanism to replace LIBOR, by identifying benchmark rates based on SOFR that will replace LIBOR in certain financial contracts after June 30, 2023. These regulations apply only to contracts governed by U.S. law, among other limitations. The regulations include provisions that

(i) provide a safe harbor for selection or use of a replacement benchmark rate selected by the Federal Reserve Board; (ii) clarify who may choose the replacement benchmark rate selected by the Federal Reserve Board; and (iii) ensure that contracts adopting a replacement benchmark rate selected by the Federal Reserve Board will not be interrupted or terminated following the replacement of LIBOR.

Neither the effect of the LIBOR transition process nor its ultimate success can yet be known. Not all existing LIBOR-based instruments may have alternative rate-setting provisions and there remains uncertainty regarding the willingness and ability of issuers to add alternative rate-setting provisions in certain existing instruments. Parties to contracts, securities or other instruments using LIBOR may disagree on transition rates or the application of transition regulation, potentially resulting in uncertainty of performance and the possibility of litigation. The Funds may have instruments linked to other interbank offered rates that may also cease to be published in the future.

Loan Participation Agreements. Each Fund may purchase interests in loan participations that typically represent direct participation in a loan to a corporate borrower, and generally are offered by an intermediary bank or other financial institution or lending syndicate. Under these loan participation arrangements, a Fund will have the right to receive payments of principal, interest and any fees to which it is entitled from the bank selling the loan participation upon receipt by the bank of the payments from the borrower. The borrower in the underlying loan will be deemed to be the issuer of the participation interest except to the extent the Fund derives its rights from the intermediary bank that sold the loan participation. Such loans must be made to issuers in whose obligations the Funds may invest.

Because the bank issuing the loan participation does not guarantee the participation in any way, the participation is subject to the credit risks associated with the underlying corporate borrower. In addition, it may be necessary under the terms of the loan participation for the Funds to assert their rights against the underlying corporate borrower in the event that the underlying corporate borrower should fail to pay principal and interest when due. Thus, the Funds could be subject to delays, expenses, and risks that are greater than those that would have been involved if the Funds had purchased a direct obligation of the borrower. Moreover, under the terms of the loan participation, the Funds may be regarded as creditors of the issuing bank (rather than of the underlying corporate borrower), so that the Funds also may be subject to the risk that the issuing bank may become insolvent. Further, in the event of the bankruptcy or insolvency of the corporate borrower, the loan participation might be subject to certain defenses that can be asserted by the borrower as a result of improper conduct by the issuing bank.

The secondary market, if any, for these loan participation interests is limited; thus, such participations purchased by the Funds may be treated as illiquid. If a loan participation is determined to be illiquid, it will be valued by the Institutional Fund at its fair market value as determined by procedures approved by the Board of Trustees. Valuation of illiquid indebtedness involves a greater degree of judgment in determining the value of the Institutional Fund’s assets than if the value were based on available market quotations.

Medium-Term Notes. A Fund may invest in medium-term notes that have remaining maturities that are consistent with the conditions of Rule 2a-7. Medium-term notes are a form of corporate debt financing. They are often issued on a regular or continuous basis without the requirement to produce a new set of legal documentation at the time of each issuance. Medium-term notes have maturities that range widely based on the needs of the issuer; although they most often mature between nine months and ten years, they may have longer maturities.

Mortgage Pass-Through Securities. Each Fund may invest in mortgage pass-through securities, which are a category of pass-through securities backed by pools of mortgages and issued by one of several U.S. Government entities or U.S. Government-sponsored enterprises including: the Government National Mortgage Association (“Ginnie Mae”), the Federal National Mortgage Association (“Fannie Mae”) and the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation. In the basic mortgage pass-through structure, mortgages with similar issuer, term and coupon characteristics are collected and aggregated into a “pool” consisting of multiple mortgage loans. The pool is assigned a CUSIP number and undivided interests in the pool are traded

and sold as pass-through securities. The holder of the security is entitled to a pro rata share of principal and interest payments (including unscheduled prepayments) from the pool of mortgage loans.

The Funds may, to the extent permitted by Rule 2a-7 under the 1940 Act, invest in mortgage securities issued by private non-government entities. Mortgage securities issued by non-government entities may be subject to greater credit risk than those issued by government entities or government-sponsored enterprises. The performance of privately-issued mortgage securities may depend on the integrity and competence of the institutions that originate the underlying mortgages, yet investors in these mortgage securities may have only limited access to information enabling investors to evaluate the practices of these mortgage originators.

In order to prevent defaults by troubled mortgage borrowers, the sponsors of mortgage securities may have to renegotiate and investors in mortgage securities issued by government entities, government-sponsored enterprises or non-government entities may have to accept less favorable interest rates or other terms on the mortgages underlying these securities. Unanticipated mortgage defaults or renegotiations of mortgage terms are likely to depress the prices of related mortgage securities. Should the government adopt new laws providing mortgage borrowers with additional rights to renegotiate interest rates, alter terms, obtain orders to modify their mortgage terms through the bankruptcy courts, or otherwise allow borrowers to modify or restructure existing mortgages, this may negatively impact mortgage securities. Although mortgage securities may be supported by some form of government or private guarantee and/or insurance, there is no assurance that guarantors or insurers will meet their obligations. Guarantees, insurance and other forms of credit enhancement supporting mortgage securities may also be insufficient to cover all losses on underlying mortgages if mortgage borrowers default at a greater than expected rate. Non-government mortgage securities may be subject to greater price changes than government issues.

An investment in a specific pool of pass-through securities requires an analysis of the specific prepayment risk of mortgages within the covered pool (since mortgagors typically have the option to prepay their loans). The level of prepayments on a pool of mortgage securities is difficult to predict and can impact the subsequent cash flows and value of the mortgage pool. In addition, when trading specific mortgage pools, precise execution, delivery and settlement arrangements must be negotiated for each transaction. These factors combine to make trading in mortgage pools somewhat cumbersome. For these and other reasons, the Funds may obtain exposure to U.S. agency mortgage pass-through securities primarily through the use of “to-be-announced” or “TBA” transactions. “TBA” refers to a commonly used mechanism for the forward settlement of U.S. agency mortgage pass-through securities, and not to a separate type of mortgage-backed security. Most transactions in mortgage pass-through securities occur through the use of TBA transactions. TBA transactions generally are conducted in accordance with widely-accepted guidelines that establish commonly observed terms and conditions for execution, settlement and delivery. In a TBA transaction, the buyer and seller decide on general trade parameters, such as agency, settlement date, par amount, and price. The actual pools delivered generally are determined two days prior to the settlement date. The Funds may use TBA transactions in several ways. For example, the Funds may regularly enter into TBA agreements and “roll over” such agreements prior to the settlement date stipulated in such agreements. This type of TBA transaction is sometimes known as a “TBA roll.” In a TBA roll, a Fund generally will sell the obligation to purchase the pools stipulated in the TBA agreement prior to the stipulated settlement date and will enter into a new TBA agreement for future delivery of pools of mortgage pass-through securities. In addition, a Fund may enter into TBA agreements and settle such transactions on the stipulated settlement date by accepting actual receipt or delivery of the pools of mortgage pass-through securities stipulated in the TBA agreement. Default by or bankruptcy of a counterparty to a TBA transaction would expose a Fund to possible loss because of adverse market action, expenses or delays in connection with the purchase or sale of the pools of mortgage pass-through securities specified in the TBA transaction. To minimize this risk, the Funds will enter into TBA transactions only with established counterparties (such as major broker-dealers) and BFA will monitor the creditworthiness of such counterparties. The use of TBA rolls may cause the Funds to experience higher portfolio turnover and to pay higher capital gain distributions, which may result in larger amounts of short-term capital gains allocable to shareholders.

Mortgage Securities. BlackRock Cash Funds: Institutional may invest in mortgage securities. Mortgage securities are issued by government and non-government entities such as banks, mortgage lenders, or other institutions. A mortgage security is an obligation of the issuer that is backed by a mortgage or pool of mortgages or a direct interest in an underlying pool of mortgages. Some mortgage securities, such as collateralized mortgage obligations, make payments of both principal and interest at a range of specified intervals; others make semi-annual interest payments at a pre-determined rate and repay principal at maturity (like a typical bond). Mortgage securities are based on different types of mortgages, including those on commercial real estate or residential properties. Stripped mortgage securities are created when the interest and principal components of a mortgage security are separated and sold as individual securities. In the case of a stripped mortgage security, the holder of the “principal-only” security (PO) receives the principal payments made by the underlying mortgage, while the holder of the “interest-only” security (IO) receives interest payments from the same underlying mortgage.

The value of mortgage securities may change due to shifts in the market’s perception of the creditworthiness of issuers and changes in interest rates or liquidity. The value of some mortgage-backed securities may be particularly sensitive to changes in prevailing interest rates. In addition, regulatory or tax changes may adversely affect the mortgage securities market as a whole. Mortgage securities issued by non-government entities may be subject to greater credit risk than those issued by government entities. The performance of privately-issued mortgage securities may depend on the integrity and competence of the institutions that originate the underlying mortgages, yet investors in these mortgage securities may have only limited access to information required to evaluate the practices of these mortgage originators. In order to prevent defaults by troubled mortgage borrowers, the sponsors of mortgage securities may have to renegotiate and investors in mortgage securities may have to accept less favorable interest rates or other terms on the mortgages underlying these securities. Unanticipated mortgage defaults or renegotiations of mortgage terms are likely to depress the prices of related mortgage securities. Although mortgage securities may be supported by some form of government or private guarantee and/or insurance, there is no assurance that private guarantors or insurers will meet their obligations. Guarantees, insurance and other forms of credit enhancement supporting mortgage securities may also be insufficient to cover all losses on underlying mortgages if mortgage borrowers default at a greater than expected rate.

Non-government mortgage securities may be subject to greater price changes than government issues. Mortgage securities are subject to prepayment risk. Prepayment risk is the risk that early principal payments made on the underlying mortgages, usually in response to a reduction in interest rates, will result in the return of principal to the investor, causing the investor to be invested subsequently at a lower current interest rate. Alternatively, in a rising interest rate environment, mortgage security values may be adversely affected when prepayments on underlying mortgages do not occur as anticipated, resulting in the extension of the security’s effective maturity and the related increase in interest rate sensitivity of a longer-term instrument. The prices of stripped mortgage securities tend to be more volatile in response to changes in interest rates than those of non-stripped mortgage securities. In addition, although mortgages and mortgage-related securities are generally supported by some form of government or private guarantee and/or insurance, there is no assurance that private guarantors or insurers will meet their obligations. Also see “Asset-Backed and Commercial Mortgage-Backed Securities” and “Mortgage Pass-Through Securities.”

Municipal Securities. Each Fund may invest in municipal securities. Municipal securities are generally issued by states and local governments and their agencies, authorities and other instrumentalities. Municipal bonds are subject to interest rate, credit and market risk. The ability of a municipal security issuer to make payments on that security could be affected by litigation, legislation or other political events or the bankruptcy of the issuer. Lower-rated municipal bonds are subject to greater credit and market risk than higher quality municipal bonds. Municipal securities in which the Funds may invest include, but are not limited to, municipal lease obligations and securities issued by entities whose underlying assets are municipal bonds. There is no guarantee that income from municipal securities will be exempt from federal and state taxes. Changes in federal or state tax treatment of municipal securities may make municipal securities less attractive as investments or cause them to lose value.

Each Fund will invest in high-quality, long-term municipal bonds, municipal notes and short-term commercial paper with remaining maturities not exceeding 397 calendar days.

Non-U.S. Obligations. The Funds may invest in certain securities of non-U.S. issuers. Investing in the securities of non-U.S. issuers involves special risks and considerations not typically associated with investing in U.S. issuers.

These include differences in accounting, auditing and financial reporting standards, the possibility of expropriation or potentially confiscatory taxation, adverse changes in investment or exchange control regulations, political instability which could affect U.S. investments in non-U.S. countries, potential restrictions of the flow of international capital and transaction costs of foreign currency conversions. Non-U.S. issuers may be subject to less governmental regulation than U.S. issuers. Moreover, individual non-U.S. economies may differ favorably or unfavorably from the U.S. economy with respect to growth of gross domestic product, rate of inflation, capital reinvestment, resource self-sufficiency and balance of payment positions.

The Funds may invest in U.S. dollar-denominated short-term obligations issued or guaranteed by one or more foreign governments or any of their political subdivisions, agencies or instrumentalities that are determined by BFA to be of comparable quality to the other obligations in which the Funds may invest. The Funds may also invest in debt obligations of supranational entities. Supranational entities include international organizations designated or supported by governmental entities to promote economic reconstruction or development and international banking institutions and related government agencies. Examples include the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (the World Bank), the Asian Development Bank and the InterAmerican Development Bank. The percentage of each Fund’s assets invested in obligations of foreign governments and supranational entities will vary depending on the relative yields of such securities, the economic and financial markets of the countries in which the investments are made and the interest rate climate of such countries.

Participation Interests. Each Fund may invest in participation interests in any type of security in which the Fund may invest. A participation interest gives the Fund an undivided interest in the underlying securities in the proportion that the Fund’s participation interest bears to the total principal amount of the underlying securities.

Regulation Regarding Derivatives. The Commodity Futures Trading Commission (“CFTC”) subjects advisers to registered investment companies to regulation by the CFTC if a fund that is advised by the investment adviser either (i) invests, directly or indirectly, more than a prescribed level of its liquidation value in CFTC-regulated futures, options and swaps (“CFTC Derivatives”), or (ii) markets itself as providing investment exposure to such instruments. To the extent a Fund uses CFTC Derivatives, it intends to do so below such prescribed levels and will not market itself as a “commodity pool” or a vehicle for trading such instruments. Accordingly, BFA has claimed an exclusion from the definition of the term “commodity pool operator” under the Commodity Exchange Act (“CEA”) pursuant to Rule 4.5 under the CEA. BFA is not, therefore, subject to registration or regulation as a “commodity pool operator” under the CEA in respect of the Funds.

Recent Market Events. Stresses associated with the 2008 financial crisis in the United States and global economies peaked approximately a decade ago, but periods of unusually high volatility in the financial markets and restrictive credit conditions, sometimes limited to a particular sector or a geography, continue to recur. Some countries, including the United States, have adopted and/or are considering the adoption of more protectionist trade policies, a move away from the tighter financial industry regulations that followed the financial crisis, and/or substantially reducing corporate taxes. The exact shape of these policies is still being considered, but the equity and debt markets may react strongly to expectations of change, which could increase volatility, especially if the market’s expectations are not borne out. A rise in protectionist trade policies, and the possibility of changes to some international trade agreements, could affect the economies of many nations in ways that cannot necessarily be foreseen at the present time. In addition, geopolitical and other risks, including environmental and public health, may add to instability in world economies and markets generally. Economies and financial markets throughout the world are becoming increasingly interconnected. As a result, whether or not a Fund invests in securities of issuers located in or with significant exposure to countries experiencing economic, political and/or financial difficulties, the value and liquidity of the Fund’s investments may be negatively affected by such events.

Governments and regulators may take actions that affect the regulation of the Fund or the instruments in which the Fund invests, or the issuers of such instruments, in ways that are unforeseeable. Future legislation or

regulation or other governmental actions could limit or preclude the Fund’s abilities to achieve its investment objectives or otherwise adversely impact an investment in the Fund. Additionally, from time to time, uncertainty regarding the status of negotiations in the U.S. government to increase the statutory debt ceiling could impact the creditworthiness of the United States and could impact the liquidity of the U.S. Government securities markets and ultimately the Fund.

An outbreak of respiratory disease caused by a novel coronavirus (COVID-19) that was first detected in China in December 2019 developed into a global pandemic. Although vaccines have been developed and approved for use by various governments, the duration of the pandemic and its effects cannot be predicted with certainty. This pandemic has resulted in closing borders, enhanced health screenings, healthcare service preparation and delivery, quarantines, cancellations, disruptions to supply chains and customer activity, as well as general concern and uncertainty. Disruptions in markets can adversely impact a Fund and its investments. Further, certain local markets have been or may be subject to closures, and there can be no certainty regarding whether trading will continue in any local markets in which a Fund may invest, when any resumption of trading will occur or, once such markets resume trading, whether they will face further closures. Any suspension of trading in markets in which a Fund invests will have an impact on the Fund and its investments and will impact the Fund’s ability to purchase or sell securities in such market. The outbreak could also impair the information technology and other operational systems upon which a Fund’s service providers, including BlackRock, rely, and could otherwise disrupt the ability of employees of a Fund’s service providers to perform critical tasks relating to the Fund. The impact of this outbreak has adversely affected the economies of many nations and the entire global economy and may impact individual issuers and capital markets in ways that cannot be foreseen. In the past, governmental and quasi-governmental authorities and regulators through the world have at times responded to major economic disruptions with a variety of fiscal and monetary policy changes, including direct capital infusions into companies and other issuers, new monetary policy tools, and lower interest rates. An unexpected or sudden reversal of these policies, or the ineffectiveness of such policies, is likely to increase market volatility, which could adversely affect a Fund’s investments. Public health crises caused by the outbreak may exacerbate other preexisting political, social and economic risks in certain countries or globally. Other infectious illness outbreaks that may arise in the future could have similar or other unforeseen effects. The duration of this outbreak or others and their effects cannot be determined with certainty.

Repurchase Agreements. The Funds may enter into repurchase agreements. A repurchase agreement is an instrument under which the purchaser (i.e., the Fund) acquires the security and the seller agrees, at the time of the sale, to repurchase the security at a mutually agreed upon time and price, thereby determining the yield during the purchaser’s holding period. In accordance with guidance issued by the Staff of the SEC, each Fund may also transfer uninvested cash balances into a single joint account, the daily aggregate balance of which will be invested in one or more repurchase agreements. The Board of Trustees has established and periodically reviews procedures applicable to transactions involving such joint accounts. Repurchase agreements may be construed to be collateralized loans by the purchaser to the seller secured by the securities transferred to the purchaser. If a repurchase agreement is construed to be a collateralized loan, the underlying securities will not be considered to be owned by each Fund but only to constitute collateral for the seller’s obligation to pay the repurchase price, and, in the event of a default by the seller, each Fund may suffer time delays and incur costs or losses in connection with the disposition of the collateral.

The collateral for a repurchase agreement may include (i) cash items; (ii) obligations issued by the U.S. Government or its agencies or instrumentalities; or (iii) obligations that, at the time the repurchase agreement is entered into, are rated in the highest category generally by at least two nationally recognized statistical rating organizations (“NRSRO”), or, if unrated, determined to be of comparable quality by BFA. Collateral, however, is not limited to the foregoing and may include for example obligations rated in any category by NRSROs, including collateral that may be below investment grade. Collateral for a repurchase agreement may also include securities that a Fund could not hold directly without the repurchase obligation. Irrespective of the type of collateral underlying the repurchase agreement, in the case of a repurchase agreement entered into by a money market fund, the repurchase obligation of a seller must involve minimal credit risk to a Fund, and otherwise satisfy credit quality standards set forth in the Fund’s Rule 2a-7 procedures.

Repurchase agreements pose certain risks for a Fund that utilizes them. Such risks are not unique to the Fund but are inherent in repurchase agreements. The Funds seek to minimize such risks but because of the inherent

legal uncertainties involved in repurchase agreements, such risks cannot be eliminated. Lower quality collateral and collateral with longer maturities may be subject to greater price fluctuations than higher quality collateral and collateral with shorter maturities. If the repurchase agreement counterparty were to default, lower quality collateral may be more difficult to liquidate than higher quality collateral. Should the counterparty default and the amount of collateral not be sufficient to cover the counterparty’s repurchase obligation, the Fund would retain the status of an unsecured creditor of the counterparty (i.e., the position the Fund would normally be in if it were to hold, pursuant to its investment policies, other unsecured debt securities of the defaulting counterparty) with respect to the amount of the shortfall. As an unsecured creditor, a Fund would be at risk of losing some or all of the principal and income involved in the transaction.

Regulations adopted by global prudential regulators that are now in effect require certain bank-regulated counterparties and certain of their affiliates to include in certain financial contracts, including many repurchase agreements and purchase and sale contracts, terms that delay or restrict the rights of counterparties, such as a Fund, to terminate such agreements, take foreclosure action, exercise other default rights or restrict transfers of credit support in the event that the counterparty and/or its affiliates are subject to certain types of resolution or insolvency proceedings. It is possible that these new requirements, as well as potential additional government regulation and other developments in the market, could adversely affect a Fund’s ability to terminate existing repurchase agreements and purchase and sale contracts or to realize amounts to be received under such agreements.

Restricted Securities. Restricted securities are subject to legal restrictions on their sale. Difficulty in selling restricted securities may result in a loss or be costly to the Funds. Restricted securities generally can be sold in privately negotiated transactions, pursuant to an exemption from registration under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or in a registered public offering. Where registration is required, the restricted security’s holder may be obligated to pay all or part of the registration expense and a considerable period may elapse between the time the holder decides to seek registration and the time the holder may be permitted to sell the security under an effective registration statement. If, during that period, adverse market conditions were to develop, the holder might obtain a less favorable price than prevailed when it decided to seek registration of the security.

Securities Lending.⁽¹⁾ Each Fund may lend portfolio securities to certain borrowers determined to be creditworthy by BFA, including to borrowers affiliated with BFA. The borrowers provide collateral that is maintained in an amount at least equal to the current market value of the securities loaned. No securities loan shall be made on behalf of a Fund if, as a result, the aggregate value of all securities loans of the particular Fund exceeds one-third of the value of such Fund’s total assets (including the value of the collateral received). A Fund may terminate a loan at any time and obtain the return of the securities loaned. Each Fund is paid the value of any interest or cash or non-cash distributions paid on the loaned securities that it would have otherwise received if the securities were not on loan.

With respect to loans that are collateralized by cash, the borrower may be entitled to receive a fee based on the amount of cash collateral. The Funds are compensated by the difference between the amount earned on the reinvestment of cash collateral and the fee paid to the borrower. In the case of collateral other than cash, a Fund is compensated by a fee paid by the borrower equal to a percentage of the market value of the loaned securities. Any cash collateral received by the Fund for such loans, and uninvested cash, may be invested, among other things, in a private investment company managed by an affiliate of BFA or in registered money market funds advised by BFA or its affiliates; such investments are subject to investment risk.

Securities lending involves exposure to certain risks, including operational risk (i.e., the risk of losses resulting from problems in the settlement and accounting process), “gap” risk (i.e., the risk of a mismatch between the return on cash collateral reinvestments and the fees each Fund has agreed to pay a borrower), and credit, legal, counterparty and market risk. If a securities lending counterparty were to default, a Fund would be subject to the risk of a possible delay in receiving collateral or in recovering the loaned securities, or to a possible loss of rights in the collateral. In the event a borrower does not return a Fund’s securities as agreed, the Fund may experience losses if the proceeds received from liquidating the collateral do not at least equal the

value of the loaned security at the time the collateral is liquidated, plus the transaction costs incurred in purchasing replacement securities. This event could trigger adverse tax consequences for a Fund. A Fund could lose money if its short-term investment of the collateral declines in value over the period of the loan. Substitute payments for dividends received by a Fund for securities loaned out by the Fund will not be considered qualified dividend income. The securities lending agent will take the tax effects on shareholders of this difference into account in connection with the Fund’s securities lending program. Substitute payments received on tax-exempt securities loaned out will not be tax-exempt income.

Regulations adopted by global prudential regulators that are now in effect require certain bank-regulated counterparties and certain of their affiliates to include in certain financial contracts, including many securities lending agreements, terms that delay or restrict the rights of counterparties, such as a Fund, to terminate such agreements, foreclose upon collateral, exercise other default rights or restrict transfers of credit support in the event that the counterparty and/or its affiliates are subject to certain types of resolution or insolvency proceedings. It is possible that these new requirements, as well as potential additional government regulation and other developments in the market, could adversely affect a Fund’s ability to terminate existing securities lending agreements or to realize amounts to be received under such agreements.

Unrated Investments. If permitted by their investment strategies, each Fund may purchase instruments that are not rated if, in the opinion of BFA, such obligations are of an investment quality that is comparable to other investments that are permitted for purchase by a Fund, and they are purchased in accordance with the Trust’s procedures adopted by the Board of Trustees in accordance with Rule 2a-7 under the 1940 Act. After purchase by a Fund, a security may cease to be rated or its rating may be reduced. If a portfolio security ceases to be an eligible security under Rule 2a-7 (e.g., no longer presents minimal credit risks in the determination of BFA), or there is a default with respect to the portfolio security (other than an immaterial default unrelated to the financial condition of the issuer), or an event of insolvency occurs with respect to the issuer of a portfolio security or the provider of any demand feature or guarantee, the Fund shall dispose of such security as soon as practicable consistent with achieving an orderly disposition of the security, unless the Board of Trustees finds that the disposal of such security would not be in such Fund’s best interests.

U.S. Government Obligations. Each Fund may invest in U.S. Government obligations, including securities issued or guaranteed as to principal and interest by the U.S. Government, its agencies or instrumentalities. Payment of principal and interest on U.S. Government obligations (i) may be backed by the full faith and credit of the United States (as with U.S. Treasury obligations and Ginnie Mae certificates), or (ii) may be backed solely by the issuing or guaranteeing agency or instrumentality itself (as with Fannie Mae notes). In the latter case, the investor must look principally to the agency or instrumentality issuing or guaranteeing the obligation for ultimate repayment, which agency or instrumentality may be privately owned. There can be no assurance that the U.S. Government would provide financial support to its agencies or instrumentalities where it is not obligated to do so. As a general matter, the value of debt instruments, including U.S. Government obligations, declines when market interest rates increase and rises when market interest rates decrease. Certain types of U.S. Government obligations are subject to fluctuations in yield or value due to their structure or contract terms.

U.S. Treasury Obligations. U.S. Treasury obligations are direct obligations of the U.S. Government that are backed by the full faith and credit of the United States. U.S. Treasury obligations include, among other things, U.S. Treasury bills, notes, bonds, and the separately traded principal and interest components of securities guaranteed or issued by the U.S. Treasury if such components are traded independently under the Separate Trading of Registered Interest and Principal of Securities Program.

The Board of Trustees of the Trust, the Board of Trustees of MIP and the Board of Directors of BFA have each approved Portfolio Information Distribution Guidelines (the “Policy”) regarding the disclosure of the Funds’ or Master Portfolios’ portfolio securities, as applicable, and other portfolio information. The purpose of the Policy is to ensure that (i) shareholders and prospective shareholders of the Fund have equal access to portfolio holdings and characteristics and (ii) third parties (such as consultants, intermediaries and third-party data providers) have access to such information no earlier and no more frequently than shareholders and prospective shareholders.

Pursuant to the Policy, the Trust, MIP and BFA may, under certain circumstances as set forth below, make selective disclosure with respect to a Fund’s or Master Portfolio’s Portfolio Characteristics (as defined below)

and Portfolio Holdings (as defined below). The Boards of Trustees of the Trust and MIP have approved the adoption by the Trust and MIP, respectively, of the Policy, and employees of BFA are responsible for adherence to the Policy. The Boards of Trustees of the Trust and MIP provide ongoing oversight of the Trust’s, MIP’s and BFA’s compliance with the Policy.

Disclosure of material non-public information (“Confidential Information”) about a Fund’s or Master Portfolio’s Portfolio Holdings and/or Portfolio Characteristics is prohibited, except as provided in the Policy.

Confidential Information relating to the Trust or MIP may not be distributed to persons not employed by BlackRock unless the Trust or MIP has a legitimate business purpose for doing so and confidentiality obligations are in effect, as appropriate.

Portfolio Holdings: “Portfolio Holdings” are a Fund’s portfolio securities and other instruments, and include, but are not limited to:

Portfolio Characteristics (excluding Liquidity Metrics): “Portfolio Characteristics” include, but are not limited to, sector allocation, credit quality breakdown, maturity distribution, duration and convexity measures, average credit quality, average maturity, average coupon, top 10 holdings with percent of the fund held, average market capitalization, capitalization range, risk related information (e.g., value at risk, standard deviation), ROE, P/E, P/B, P/CF, P/S and EPS.

Information that is non-material or that may be obtained from public sources (i.e., information that has been publicly disclosed via a filing with the SEC (e.g., a fund’s annual report), through a press release or placement on a publicly-available internet website), or information derived or calculated from such public sources shall not be deemed Confidential Information.

Portfolio Holdings and Portfolio Characteristics may be disclosed in accordance with the below schedule.

Guidelines for Confidential and Non-Material Information. Confidential Information may be disclosed to the Trustees of the Trust or MIP and their respective counsel, outside counsel for the Trust or MIP, the Trust’s or MIP’s auditors and to certain third-party service providers (i.e., fund administrator, custodian, proxy voting service) for which a non-disclosure or confidentiality agreement is in place with such service providers. With respect to Confidential Information, the Trust’s or MIP’s CCO or his or her designee may authorize the following, subject in the case of (ii) and (iii) to a confidentiality or non-disclosure arrangement:

Other Information. The Policy shall also apply to other Confidential Information of a Fund or Master Portfolio such as performance attribution analyses or security-specific information (e.g., information about Fund or Master Portfolio holdings where an issuer has been downgraded, been acquired or declared bankruptcy).

Data on NAVs, asset levels (by total Fund or Master Portfolio and share class), accruals, yields, capital gains, dividends and fund returns (net of fees by share class) are generally available to shareholders, prospective shareholders, consultants, and third-party data providers upon request, as soon as such data is available.

Contact Information. For information about portfolio holdings and characteristics, BlackRock fund shareholders and prospective investors should call the number set out on the back cover of the Prospectus.

Compensation. Neither a Fund or Master Portfolio, a service provider nor any of their affiliated persons (as that term is defined in the 1940 Act) shall receive compensation in any form in connection with the disclosure of information about such Fund or Master Portfolio’s Portfolio Holdings or Portfolio Characteristics.

Ongoing Arrangements. BFA has entered into ongoing agreements to provide selective disclosure of Fund or Master Portfolio Portfolio Holdings to the following persons or entities:

With respect to each such arrangement, the Trust or MIP has a legitimate business purpose for the release of information. The release of the information is subject to confidential treatment to prohibit the entity from sharing with an unauthorized source or trading upon the information provided. The Trust, MIP, BlackRock and their affiliates do not receive any compensation or other consideration in connection with such arrangements.

The Trust, MIP and BFA monitor, to the extent possible, the use of Confidential Information by the individuals or firms to which it has been disclosed. To do so, in addition to the requirements of any applicable confidentiality agreement and/or the terms and conditions of the Trust’s, MIP’s and BFA’s Codes of Ethics — all of which require persons or entities in possession of Confidential Information to keep such information confidential and not to trade on such information for their own benefit — BFA’s compliance personnel under the supervision of the Trust’s or MIP’s Chief Compliance Officer, monitor BFA’s securities trading desks to determine whether individuals or firms who have received Confidential Information have made any trades on the basis of that information. In addition, BFA maintains an internal restricted list to prevent trading by the personnel of BFA or its affiliates in securities — including securities held by a Fund/Master Portfolio — about which BFA has Confidential Information. There can be no assurance, however, that the Trust’s or MIP’s policies and procedures with respect to the selective disclosure of Portfolio Holdings will prevent the misuse of such information by individuals or firms that receive such information.

The Board of Trustees of the Trust consists of twelve individuals (each, a “Trustee”), ten of whom are not “interested persons” of the Trust as defined in the 1940 Act (the “Independent Trustees”). The same individuals serve on the Board of Trustees of MIP. The registered investment companies advised by the Manager or its affiliates (the “BlackRock-advised Funds”) are organized into the BlackRock Multi-Asset Complex, the BlackRock Fixed-Income Complex and the iShares Complex (each, a “BlackRock Fund Complex”). The Trust and MIP are included in the BlackRock Fund Complex referred to as the BlackRock Multi-Asset Complex. The Trustees also oversee as board members the operations of the other open-end registered investment companies included in the BlackRock Multi-Asset Complex.

The Board has overall responsibility for the oversight of the Trust and each Fund. The Chair of the Board is an Independent Trustee, and the Chair of each Board committee (each, a “Committee”) is an Independent Trustee. The Board has five standing Committees: an Audit Committee, a Governance and Nominating Committee, a Compliance Committee, a Performance Oversight Committee and an Ad Hoc Topics Committee. The role of the Chair of the Board is to preside at all meetings of the Board and to act as a liaison with service providers, officers, attorneys and other Trustees generally between meetings. The Chair of each

Committee performs a similar role with respect to the Committee. The Chair of the Board or the Chair of a Committee may also perform such other functions as may be delegated by the Board or the Committee from time to time. The Independent Trustees meet regularly outside the presence of Fund management, in executive session or with other service providers to each Fund. The Board has regular meetings five times a year, and may hold special meetings if required before its next regular meeting. Each Committee meets regularly to conduct the oversight functions delegated to that Committee by the Board and reports its findings to the Board. The Board and each standing Committee conduct annual assessments of their oversight function and structure. The Board has determined that the Board’s leadership structure is appropriate because it allows the Board to exercise independent judgment over management and to allocate areas of responsibility among Committees and the full Board to enhance effective oversight.

The Board has engaged the Manager to manage each Fund on a day-to-day basis. The Board is responsible for overseeing the Manager, other service providers, the operations of each Fund and associated risks in accordance with the provisions of the 1940 Act, state law, other applicable laws, the Trust’s charter, and each Fund’s investment objective and strategies. The Board reviews, on an ongoing basis, each Fund’s performance, operations and investment strategies and techniques. The Board also conducts reviews of the Manager and its role in running the operations of each Fund.

Day-to-day risk management with respect to each Fund is the responsibility of the Manager or of sub-advisers or other service providers (depending on the nature of the risk), subject to the supervision of the Manager. Each Fund is subject to a number of risks, including investment, compliance, operational and valuation risks, among others. While there are a number of risk management functions performed by the Manager and the sub-advisers or other service providers, as applicable, it is not possible to eliminate all of the risks applicable to the Funds. Risk oversight forms part of the Board’s general oversight of each Fund and is addressed as part of various Board and Committee activities. The Board, directly or through a Committee, also reviews reports from, among others, management, the independent registered public accounting firm for each Fund, sub-advisers and internal auditors for the investment adviser or its affiliates, as appropriate, regarding risks faced by each Fund and management’s or the service provider’s risk functions. The Committee system facilitates the timely and efficient consideration of matters by the Trustees, and facilitates effective oversight of compliance with legal and regulatory requirements and of each Fund’s activities and associated risks. The Board has appointed a Chief Compliance Officer, who oversees the implementation and testing of the Trust’s compliance program and reports to the Board regarding compliance matters for the Funds and their service providers. The Independent Trustees have engaged independent legal counsel to assist them in performing their oversight responsibilities.

Audit Committee. The members of the Audit Committee (the “Audit Committee”) are Henry R. Keizer (Chair), Neil A. Cotty, Lena G. Goldberg and Kenneth L. Urish, all of whom are Independent Trustees. The principal responsibilities of the Audit Committee are to approve, and recommend to the full Board for approval, the selection, retention, termination and compensation of each Fund’s independent registered public accounting firm (the “Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm”) and to oversee the Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm’s work. The Audit Committee’s responsibilities include, without limitation, to (1) evaluate the qualifications and independence of the Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm; (2) approve all audit engagement terms and fees for each Fund; (3) review the conduct and results of each independent audit of each Fund’s annual financial statements; (4) review any issues raised by the Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm or Fund management regarding the accounting or financial reporting policies and practices of each Fund and the internal controls of each Fund and certain service providers; (5) oversee the performance of each Fund’s Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm; (6) review and discuss with management and each Fund’s Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm the performance and findings of each Fund’s internal auditors; (7) discuss with Fund management its policies regarding risk assessment and risk management as such matters relate to each Fund’s financial reporting and controls; (8) resolve any disagreements between Fund management and the Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm regarding financial reporting; and (9) undertake such other duties and responsibilities as may from time to time be delegated by the Board to the Audit Committee. The Board has adopted a written charter for the Audit Committee. During the fiscal year ended December 31, 2022, the Audit Committee met four times.

Governance and Nominating Committee. The members of the Governance and Nominating Committee (the “Governance Committee”) are Cynthia A. Montgomery (Chair), Susan J. Carter, Collette Chilton and Henry R. Keizer, all of whom are Independent Trustees. The principal responsibilities of the Governance Committee are to (1) identify individuals qualified to serve as Independent Trustees of the Trust and recommend Independent Trustee nominees for election by shareholders or appointment by the Board; (2) advise the Board with respect to Board composition, procedures and committees (other than the Audit Committee); (3) oversee periodic self-assessments of the Board and committees of the Board (other than the Audit Committee); (4) review and make recommendations regarding Independent Trustee compensation; (5) monitor corporate governance matters and develop appropriate recommendations to the Board; (6) act as the administrative committee with respect to Board policies and procedures, committee policies and procedures (other than the Audit Committee) and codes of ethics as they relate to Independent Trustees; and (7) undertake such other duties and responsibilities as may from time to time be delegated by the Board to the Governance Committee. The Governance Committee may consider nominations for the office of Trustee made by Fund shareholders as it deems appropriate. Fund shareholders who wish to recommend a nominee should send nominations to the Secretary of the Trust that include biographical information and set forth the qualifications of the proposed nominee. The Board has adopted a written charter for the Governance Committee. During the fiscal year ended December 31, 2022, the Governance Committee met four times.

Compliance Committee. The members of the Compliance Committee (the “Compliance Committee”) are Lena G. Goldberg (Chair), Cynthia A. Montgomery, Donald C. Opatrny, Kenneth L. Urish and Claire A. Walton, all of whom are Independent Trustees. The Compliance Committee’s purpose is to assist the Board in fulfilling its responsibility to oversee regulatory and fiduciary compliance matters involving the Trust, the fund-related activities of BFA and any sub-adviser and the Trust’s third-party service providers. The Compliance Committee’s responsibilities include, without limitation, to (1) oversee the compliance policies and procedures of the Trust and its service providers and recommend changes or additions to such policies and procedures; (2) review information on and, where appropriate, recommend policies concerning the Trust’s compliance with applicable law; (3) review reports from, oversee the annual performance review of, and make certain recommendations and determinations regarding the Trust’s Chief Compliance Officer (the “CCO”), including determining the amount and structure of the CCO’s compensation and recommending such amount and structure to the full Board for approval and ratification; and (4) undertake such other duties and responsibilities as may from time to time be delegated by the Board to the Compliance Committee. The Board has adopted a written charter for the Compliance Committee. During the fiscal year ended December 31, 2022, the Compliance Committee met four times.

Performance Oversight Committee. The members of the Performance Oversight Committee (the “Performance Oversight Committee”) are Donald C. Opatrny (Chair), Susan J. Carter, Collette Chilton, Neil A. Cotty and Claire A. Walton, all of whom are Independent Trustees. The Performance Oversight Committee’s purpose is to assist the Board in fulfilling its responsibility to oversee each Fund’s investment performance relative to its agreed-upon performance objectives and to assist the Independent Trustees in their consideration of investment advisory agreements. The Performance Oversight Committee’s responsibilities include, without limitation, to (1) review information on, and make recommendations to the full Board in respect of, each Fund’s investment objective, policies and practices; (2) review information on each Fund’s investment performance; (3) review information on appropriate benchmarks and competitive universes and unusual or exceptional investment matters; (4) review personnel and other resources devoted to management of each Fund and evaluate the nature and quality of information furnished to the Performance Oversight Committee; (5) recommend any required action regarding changes in fundamental and non-fundamental investment policies and restrictions, fund mergers or liquidations; (6) request and review information on the nature, extent and quality of services provided to the shareholders; (7) make recommendations to the Board concerning the approval or renewal of investment advisory agreements; and (8) undertake such other duties and responsibilities as may from time to time be delegated by the Board to the Performance Oversight Committee. The Board has adopted a written charter for the Performance Oversight Committee. During the fiscal year ended December 31, 2022, the Performance Oversight Committee met four times.

Ad Hoc Topics Committee. The members of the Ad Hoc Topics Committee (the “Ad Hoc Topics Committee”) are Mark Stalnecker (Chair) and Lena G. Goldberg, both of whom are Independent Trustees, and John M. Perlowski, who serves as an interested Trustee. The principal responsibilities of the Ad Hoc Topics Committee are to (1) act on routine matters between meetings of the Board; (2) act on such matters as may require urgent action between meetings of the Board; and (3) exercise such other authority as may from time to time be delegated to the Ad Hoc Topics Committee by the Board. The Board has adopted a written charter for the Ad Hoc Topics Committee. During the fiscal year ended December 31, 2022, the Ad Hoc Topics Committee did not meet.

The Governance Committee has adopted a statement of policy that describes the experience, qualifications, skills and attributes that are necessary and desirable for potential Independent Trustee candidates (the “Statement of Policy”). The Board believes that each Independent Trustee satisfied, at the time he or she was initially elected or appointed a Trustee, and continues to satisfy, the standards contemplated by the Statement of Policy. Furthermore, in determining that a particular Independent Trustee was and continues to be qualified to serve as a Trustee, the Board has considered a variety of criteria, none of which, in isolation, was controlling. The Board believes that, collectively, the Independent Trustees have balanced and diverse experience, skills, attributes and qualifications, which allow the Board to operate effectively in governing the Trust and protecting the interests of shareholders. Among the attributes common to all Independent Trustees are their ability to review critically, evaluate, question and discuss information provided to them, to interact effectively with each Fund’s investment adviser, sub-advisers, other service providers, counsel and the Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm, and to exercise effective business judgment in the performance of their duties as Trustees.

Each Trustee’s ability to perform his or her duties effectively is evidenced by his or her educational background or professional training; business, consulting, public service or academic positions; experience from service as a board member of the Trust and the other funds in the BlackRock Fund Complexes (and any predecessor funds), other investment funds, public companies, non-profit entities or other organizations; ongoing commitment to and participation in Board and Committee meetings, as well as his or her leadership of standing and ad hoc committees throughout the years; or other relevant life experiences.

The table below discusses some of the experiences, qualifications and skills of each of the Trustees that support the conclusion that each Trustee should serve on the Board.

Certain biographical and other information relating to the Trustees of the Trust is set forth below, including their address and year of birth, principal occupations for at least the last five years, length of time served, total number of registered investment companies and investment portfolios overseen in the BlackRock-advised Funds and any currently held public company and other investment company directorships.

Certain biographical and other information relating to the officers of the Trust who are not Trustees is set forth below, including their address and year of birth, principal occupations for at least the last five years and length of time served.

Share Ownership Information. Information relating to each Trustee’s share ownership in the Funds and in all BlackRock-advised Funds that are currently overseen by the respective Trustee (“Supervised Funds”) as of December 31, 2022 is set forth in the chart below. Amounts shown may include shares as to which a Trustee has indirect beneficial ownership, such as through participation in certain family accounts, 529 college savings plan interests, or similar arrangements where the Trustee has beneficial economic interest but not a direct ownership interest.

Ownership of Securities of Certain Entities. As of April 4, 2023, the Trustees and officers of the Trust as a group directly or indirectly owned an aggregate of less than 1% of any class of the outstanding shares of each Fund. As of December 31, 2022, none of the Independent Trustees of the Trust or their immediate family members owned beneficially or of record any securities of each Fund’s investment adviser, sub-adviser (where applicable), principal underwriter, or any person directly or indirectly controlling, controlled by, or under common control with such entities.

Compensation of Trustees. Each Trustee who is an Independent Trustee is paid as compensation an annual retainer of $325,000 per year for his or her services as a board member of the BlackRock-advised Funds in the BlackRock Multi-Asset Complex, including the Trust and MIP, and a $20,000 board meeting fee to be paid for each in-person board meeting attended (and may receive a board meeting fee for telephonic attendance at board meetings), for up to five board meetings held in a calendar year (compensation for meetings in excess of this number to be determined on a case-by-case basis), together with out-of-pocket expenses in accordance with a board policy on travel and other business expenses relating to attendance at meetings. The Chairs of the Audit Committee, Compliance Committee, Governance Committee and Performance Committee are paid as compensation an additional annual retainer of $45,000, respectively. The Chair of the Boards is paid an additional annual retainer of $150,000.

The following table sets forth the compensation MIP paid to the Trustees on behalf of the Master Portfolios for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2022 and the aggregate compensation paid to them by all BlackRock-advised Funds for the calendar year ended December 31, 2022. The Trustees received no additional compensation from the Trust on behalf of the Funds.

Codes of Ethics. The Trust, BFA, the Sub-Adviser and BlackRock Investments, LLC, the Funds’ distributor (the “Distributor”) have adopted Codes of Ethics pursuant to Rule 17j-1 under the 1940 Act. The Codes of Ethics permit personnel subject to the Codes of Ethics to invest in securities, subject to certain limitations, including securities that may be purchased or held by the Funds. The Codes of Ethics are on public file with, and are available from, the SEC.

Proxy Voting Policies of the Master Portfolios. The Board of Trustees of MIP has delegated the voting of proxies for each Master Portfolio’s securities to BFA pursuant to MIP’s proxy voting guidelines. Under these guidelines, BFA will vote proxies related to the securities held by each Master Portfolio in the best interests of the Master

Portfolio and its stockholders. From time to time, a vote may present a conflict between the interests of the Master Portfolio’s stockholders, on the one hand, and those of BFA, or any affiliated person of MIP or BFA, on the other. The Manager maintains policies and procedures that are designed to prevent undue influence on the Manager’s proxy voting activity that might stem from any relationship between the issuer of a proxy (or any dissident shareholder) and the Manager, the Manager’s affiliates, a Fund or a Fund’s affiliates. Most conflicts are managed through a structural separation of the Manager’s Corporate Governance Group from the Manager’s employees with sales and client responsibilities. In addition, the Manager maintains procedures to ensure that all engagements with corporate issuers or dissident shareholders are managed consistently and without regard to the Manager’s relationship with the issuer of the proxy or dissident shareholder. In certain instances, the Manager may determine to engage an independent fiduciary to vote proxies as a further safeguard to avoid potential conflicts of interest or as otherwise required by applicable law. Copies of MIP’s Proxy Voting Policy, BlackRock’s Global Corporate Governance & Engagement Principles and BlackRock’s Corporate Governance and Proxy Voting Guidelines for U.S. Securities are attached as Appendix A.

Information on how each Master Portfolio voted proxies relating to portfolio securities during the most recent 12-month period ended June 30 is available without charge, (i) at www.blackrock.com and (ii) on the Commission’s website at http://www.sec.gov.

Shareholder Communication to the Board of Trustees. The Board of Trustees has established a process for shareholders to communicate with the Board of Trustees. Shareholders may contact the Board of Trustees by mail. Correspondence should be addressed to BlackRock Funds III Board of Trustees, c/o BlackRock, Inc., 50 Hudson Yards, New York, NY 10001. Shareholder communication to the Board of Trustees should include the following information: (a) the name and address of the shareholder; (b) the number of shares owned by the shareholder; (c) the Fund(s) of which the shareholder owns shares; and (d) if these shares are owned indirectly through a broker, financial intermediary or other record owner, the name of the broker, financial intermediary or other record owner. All correspondence received as set forth above shall be reviewed by the Secretary of the Trust and reported to the Board of Trustees.

Potential Conflicts of Interest. Certain activities of BlackRock, Inc., BlackRock Advisors, LLC, BlackRock Fund Advisors and the other subsidiaries of BlackRock, Inc. (collectively referred to in this section as “BlackRock”) and their respective directors, officers or employees, with respect to the Funds and/or other accounts managed by BlackRock, may give rise to actual or perceived conflicts of interest such as those described below.

BlackRock is one of the world’s largest asset management firms. BlackRock, its subsidiaries and their respective directors, officers and employees, including the business units or entities and personnel who may be involved in the investment activities and business operations of a Fund, are engaged worldwide in businesses, including managing equities, fixed income securities, cash and alternative investments, and other financial services, and have interests other than that of managing the Funds. These are considerations of which investors in a Fund should be aware, and which may cause conflicts of interest that could disadvantage a Fund and its shareholders. These businesses and interests include potential multiple advisory, transactional, financial and other relationships with, or interests in companies and interests in securities or other instruments that may be purchased or sold by a Fund.

BlackRock has proprietary interests in, and may manage or advise with respect to, accounts or funds (including separate accounts and other funds and collective investment vehicles) that have investment objectives similar to those of a Fund and/or that engage in transactions in the same types of securities, currencies and instruments as the Fund. BlackRock is also a major participant in the global currency, equities, swap and fixed income markets, in each case, for the accounts of clients and, in some cases, on a proprietary basis. As such, BlackRock is or may be actively engaged in transactions in the same securities, currencies, and instruments in which a Fund invests. Such activities could affect the prices and availability of the securities, currencies, and instruments in which a Fund invests, which could have an adverse impact on a Fund’s performance. Such transactions, particularly in respect of most proprietary accounts or client accounts, will be executed independently of a Fund’s transactions and thus at prices or rates that may be more or less favorable than those obtained by the Fund.

When BlackRock seeks to purchase or sell the same assets for client accounts, including a Fund, the assets actually purchased or sold may be allocated among the accounts on a basis determined in its good faith discretion to be equitable. In some cases, this system may adversely affect the size or price of the assets purchased or sold for a Fund. In addition, transactions in investments by one or more other accounts managed by BlackRock may have the effect of diluting or otherwise disadvantaging the values, prices or investment strategies of a Fund, particularly, but not limited to, with respect to small capitalization, emerging market or less liquid strategies. This may occur with respect to BlackRock-advised accounts when investment decisions regarding a Fund are based on research or other information that is also used to support decisions for other accounts. When BlackRock implements a portfolio decision or strategy on behalf of another account ahead of, or contemporaneously with, similar decisions or strategies for a Fund, market impact, liquidity constraints, or other factors could result in the Fund receiving less favorable trading results and the costs of implementing such decisions or strategies could be increased or the Fund could otherwise be disadvantaged. BlackRock may, in certain cases, elect to implement internal policies and procedures designed to limit such consequences, which may cause a Fund to be unable to engage in certain activities, including purchasing or disposing of securities, when it might otherwise be desirable for it to do so. Conflicts may also arise because portfolio decisions regarding a Fund may benefit other accounts managed by BlackRock. For example, the sale of a long position or establishment of a short position by a Fund may impair the price of the same security sold short by (and therefore benefit) BlackRock or its other accounts or funds, and the purchase of a security or covering of a short position in a security by a Fund may increase the price of the same security held by (and therefore benefit) BlackRock or its other accounts or funds.

BlackRock, on behalf of other client accounts, on the one hand, and a Fund, on the other hand, may invest in or extend credit to different parts of the capital structure of a single issuer. BlackRock may pursue rights, provide advice or engage in other activities, or refrain from pursuing rights, providing advice or engaging in other activities, on behalf of other clients with respect to an issuer in which a Fund has invested, and such actions (or refraining from action) may have a material adverse effect on the Fund. In situations in which clients of BlackRock (including the Funds) hold positions in multiple parts of the capital structure of an issuer, BlackRock may not pursue certain actions or remedies that may be available to a Fund, as a result of legal and regulatory requirements or otherwise. BlackRock addresses these and other potential conflicts of interest based on the facts and circumstances of particular situations. For example, BlackRock may determine to rely on information barriers between different business units or portfolio management teams. BlackRock may also determine to rely on the actions of similarly situated holders of loans or securities rather than, or in connection with, taking such actions itself on behalf of the Funds.

In addition, to the extent permitted by applicable law, the Funds may invest their assets in other funds advised by BlackRock, including funds that are managed by one or more of the same portfolio managers, which could result in conflicts of interest relating to asset allocation, timing of Fund purchases and redemptions, and increased remuneration and profitability for BlackRock and/or its personnel, including portfolio managers.

In certain circumstances, BlackRock, on behalf of the Funds, may seek to buy from or sell securities to another fund or account advised by BlackRock. BlackRock may (but is not required to) effect purchases and sales between BlackRock clients (“cross trades”), including the Funds, if BlackRock believes such transactions are appropriate based on each party’s investment objectives and guidelines, subject to applicable law and regulation. There may be potential conflicts of interest or regulatory issues relating to these transactions which could limit BlackRock’s decision to engage in these transactions for the Funds. BlackRock may have a potentially conflicting division of loyalties and responsibilities to the parties in such transactions.

BlackRock and its clients may pursue or enforce rights with respect to an issuer in which a Fund has invested, and those activities may have an adverse effect on the Fund. As a result, prices, availability, liquidity and terms of the Fund’s investments may be negatively impacted by the activities of BlackRock or its clients, and transactions for the Fund may be impaired or effected at prices or terms that may be less favorable than would otherwise have been the case.

The results of a Fund’s investment activities may differ significantly from the results achieved by BlackRock for its proprietary accounts or other accounts (including investment companies or collective investment vehicles) that it manages or advises. It is possible that one or more accounts managed or advised by BlackRock and such other accounts will achieve investment results that are substantially more or less favorable than the results achieved by a Fund. Moreover, it is possible that a Fund will sustain losses during periods in which one or more proprietary or other accounts managed or advised by BlackRock achieve significant profits. The opposite result is also possible.

From time to time, a Fund may be restricted from purchasing or selling securities, or from engaging in other investment activities because of regulatory, legal or contractual requirements applicable to BlackRock or other accounts managed or advised by BlackRock, and/or the internal policies of BlackRock designed to comply with such requirements. As a result, there may be periods, for example, when BlackRock will not initiate or recommend certain types of transactions in certain securities or instruments with respect to which BlackRock is performing services or when position limits have been reached. For example, the investment activities of BlackRock for its proprietary accounts and accounts under its management may limit the investment opportunities for a Fund in certain emerging and other markets in which limitations are imposed upon the amount of investment, in the aggregate or in individual issuers, by affiliated foreign investors.

In connection with its management of a Fund, BlackRock may have access to certain fundamental analysis and proprietary technical models developed by BlackRock. BlackRock will not be under any obligation, however, to effect transactions on behalf of a Fund in accordance with such analysis and models. In addition, BlackRock will not have any obligation to make available any information regarding its proprietary activities or strategies, or the activities or strategies used for other accounts managed by them, for the benefit of the management of a Fund and it is not anticipated that BlackRock will have access to such information for the purpose of managing the Fund. The proprietary activities or portfolio strategies of BlackRock, or the activities or strategies used for accounts managed by BlackRock or other client accounts could conflict with the transactions and strategies employed by BlackRock in managing a Fund.

The Funds may be included in investment models developed by BlackRock for use by clients and financial advisors. To the extent clients invest in these investment models and increase the assets under management of the Funds, the investment management fee amounts paid by the Funds to BlackRock may also increase. The net asset value and liquidity of a Fund may be impacted by purchases and sales of the Fund by model-driven investment portfolios, as well as by BlackRock itself and by its advisory clients.

In addition, certain principals and certain employees of a Fund’s investment adviser are also principals or employees of other business units or entities within BlackRock. As a result, these principals and employees may have obligations to such other business units or entities or their clients and such obligations to other business units or entities or their clients may be a consideration of which investors in a Fund should be aware.

BlackRock may enter into transactions and invest in securities, instruments and currencies on behalf of a Fund in which clients of BlackRock, or, to the extent permitted by the Commission and applicable law, BlackRock, serves as the counterparty, principal or issuer. In such cases, such party’s interests in the transaction will be adverse to the interests of the Fund, and such party may have no incentive to assure that the Fund obtains the best possible prices or terms in connection with the transactions. In addition, the purchase, holding and sale of such investments by a Fund may enhance the profitability of BlackRock.

BlackRock may also create, write or issue derivatives for clients, the underlying securities, currencies or instruments of which may be those in which a Fund invests or which may be based on the performance of the Fund. BlackRock has entered into an arrangement with Markit Indices Limited, the index provider for underlying fixed-income indexes used by certain iShares ETFs, related to derivative fixed-income products that are based on such iShares ETFs. BlackRock will receive certain payments for licensing intellectual property belonging to BlackRock and for facilitating provision of data in connection with such derivative products, which may include payments based on the trading volumes of, or revenues generated by, the derivative products. The Funds and other accounts managed by BlackRock may from time to time transact in such derivative products where permitted by the Fund’s investment strategy, which could contribute to the

viability of such derivative products by making them more appealing to funds and accounts managed by third parties, and in turn lead to increased payments to BlackRock. Trading activity in these derivative products could also potentially lead to greater liquidity for such products, increased purchase activity with respect to these iShares ETFs and increased assets under management for BlackRock.

A Fund may, subject to applicable law, purchase investments that are the subject of an underwriting or other distribution by BlackRock and may also enter into transactions with other clients of BlackRock where such other clients have interests adverse to those of the Fund. At times, these activities may cause business units or entities within BlackRock to give advice to clients that may cause these clients to take actions adverse to the interests of the Fund. To the extent such transactions are permitted, a Fund will deal with BlackRock on an arms-length basis.

To the extent authorized by applicable law, BlackRock may act as broker, dealer, agent, lender or adviser or in other commercial capacities for a Fund. It is anticipated that the commissions, mark-ups, mark-downs, financial advisory fees, underwriting and placement fees, sales fees, financing and commitment fees, brokerage fees, other fees, compensation or profits, rates, terms and conditions charged by BlackRock will be in its view commercially reasonable, although BlackRock, including its sales personnel, will have an interest in obtaining fees and other amounts that are favorable to BlackRock and such sales personnel, which may have an adverse effect on the Funds. Index based funds may use an index provider that is affiliated with another service provider of the Fund or BlackRock that acts as a broker, dealer, agent, lender or in other commercial capacities for a Fund or BlackRock.

Subject to applicable law, BlackRock (and its personnel and other distributors) will be entitled to retain fees and other amounts that they receive in connection with their service to the Funds as broker, dealer, agent, lender, adviser or in other commercial capacities. No accounting to the Funds or their shareholders will be required, and no fees or other compensation payable by the Funds or their shareholders will be reduced by reason of receipt by BlackRock of any such fees or other amounts.

When BlackRock acts as broker, dealer, agent, adviser or in other commercial capacities in relation to the Funds, BlackRock may take commercial steps in its own interests, which may have an adverse effect on the Funds.

A Fund will be required to establish business relationships with its counterparties based on the Fund’s own credit standing. BlackRock will not have any obligation to allow its credit to be used in connection with a Fund’s establishment of its business relationships, nor is it expected that the Fund’s counterparties will rely on the credit of BlackRock in evaluating the Fund’s creditworthiness.

BTC, as applicable, each an affiliate of BlackRock, pursuant to SEC exemptive relief, acts as securities lending agent to, and receives a share of securities lending revenues from, the Funds. BlackRock will also receive compensation for managing the reinvestment of the cash collateral from securities lending. There are potential conflicts of interests in managing a securities lending program, including but not limited to: (i) BlackRock as securities lending agent may have an incentive to increase or decrease the amount of securities on loan or to lend particular securities in order to generate additional risk-adjusted revenue for BlackRock and its affiliates; and (ii) BlackRock as securities lending agent may have an incentive to allocate loans to clients that would provide more revenue to BlackRock. As described further below, BlackRock seeks to mitigate this conflict by providing its securities lending clients with equal lending opportunities over time in order to approximate pro rata allocation.

As part of its securities lending program, BlackRock indemnifies the Funds and certain other clients and/or funds against a shortfall in collateral in the event of borrower default. On a regular basis, BlackRock calculates the potential dollar exposure of collateral shortfall resulting from a borrower default (“shortfall risk”) in the securities lending program. BlackRock establishes program-wide borrower limits (“credit limits”) to actively manage borrower-specific credit exposure. BlackRock oversees the risk model that calculates projected collateral shortfall values using loan-level factors such as loan and collateral type and market value as well as specific borrower credit characteristics. When necessary, BlackRock may adjust securities lending

program attributes by restricting eligible collateral or reducing borrower credit limits. As a result, the management of program-wide exposure as well as BlackRock-specific indemnification exposure may affect the amount of securities lending activity BlackRock may conduct at any given point in time by reducing the volume of lending opportunities for certain loans (including by asset type, collateral type and/or revenue profile).

BlackRock uses a predetermined systematic process in order to approximate pro rata allocation over time. In order to allocate a loan to a portfolio: (i) BlackRock as a whole must have sufficient lending capacity pursuant to the various program limits (i.e. indemnification exposure limit and borrower credit limits); (ii) the lending portfolio must hold the asset at the time a loan opportunity arrives; and (iii) the lending portfolio must also have enough inventory, either on its own or when aggregated with other portfolios into one single market delivery, to satisfy the loan request. In doing so, BlackRock seeks to provide equal lending opportunities for all portfolios, independent of whether BlackRock indemnifies the portfolio. Equal opportunities for lending portfolios does not guarantee equal outcomes. Specifically, short and long-term outcomes for individual clients may vary due to asset mix, asset/liability spreads on different securities, and the overall limits imposed by the firm.

BlackRock may decline to make a securities loan on behalf of a Fund, discontinue lending on behalf of a Fund or terminate a securities loan on behalf of a Fund for any reason, including but not limited to regulatory requirements and/or market rules, liquidity considerations, or credit considerations, which may impact a Fund by reducing or eliminating the volume of lending opportunities for certain types of loans, loans in particular markets, loans of particular securities or types of securities, or for loans overall.

Purchases and sales of securities and other assets for a Fund may be bunched or aggregated with orders for other BlackRock client accounts, including with accounts that pay different transaction costs solely due to the fact that they have different research payment arrangements. BlackRock, however, is not required to bunch or aggregate orders if portfolio management decisions for different accounts are made separately, or if they determine that bunching or aggregating is not practicable or required, or in cases involving client direction.

Prevailing trading activity frequently may make impossible the receipt of the same price or execution on the entire volume of securities purchased or sold. When this occurs, the various prices may be averaged, and the Funds will be charged or credited with the average price. Thus, the effect of the aggregation may operate on some occasions to the disadvantage of the Funds. In addition, under certain circumstances, the Funds will not be charged the same commission or commission equivalent rates in connection with a bunched or aggregated order.

BlackRock, unless prohibited by applicable law, may cause a Fund or account to pay a broker or dealer a commission for effecting a transaction that exceeds the amount another broker or dealer would have charged for effecting the same transaction in recognition of the value of brokerage and research services provided by that broker or dealer. Under MiFID II, EU investment managers, including BlackRock International Limited (“BIL”) which acts as a sub-adviser to certain funds, pay for research from brokers and dealers directly out of their own resources, rather than through client commissions.

Subject to applicable law, BlackRock may select brokers that furnish BlackRock, the Funds, other BlackRock client accounts or personnel, directly or through correspondent relationships, with research or other appropriate services which provide, in BlackRock’s view, appropriate assistance to BlackRock in the investment decision-making process (including with respect to futures, fixed-price offerings and OTC transactions). Such research or other services may include, to the extent permitted by law, research reports on companies, industries and securities; economic and financial data; financial publications; proxy analysis; trade industry seminars; computer data bases; research-oriented software and other services and products.

Research or other services obtained in this manner may be used in servicing any or all of the Funds and other BlackRock client accounts, including in connection with BlackRock client accounts other than those that pay commissions to the broker relating to the research or other service arrangements. Such products and services may disproportionately benefit other BlackRock client accounts relative to the Funds based on the amount of

brokerage commissions paid by the Funds and such other BlackRock client accounts. For example, research or other services that are paid for through one client’s commissions may not be used in managing that client’s account. In addition, other BlackRock client accounts may receive the benefit, including disproportionate benefits, of economies of scale or price discounts in connection with products and services that may be provided to the Funds and to such other BlackRock client accounts. To the extent that BlackRock uses soft dollars, it will not have to pay for those products and services itself.

BlackRock, unless prohibited by applicable law, may endeavor to execute trades through brokers who, pursuant to such arrangements, provide research or other services in order to ensure the continued receipt of research or other services BlackRock believes are useful in its investment decision-making process. BlackRock may from time to time choose not to engage in the above described arrangements to varying degrees. BlackRock, unless prohibited by applicable law, may also enter into commission sharing arrangements under which BlackRock may execute transactions through a broker-dealer and request that the broker-dealer allocate a portion of the commissions or commission credits to another firm that provides research to BlackRock. To the extent that BlackRock engages in commission sharing arrangements, many of the same conflicts related to traditional soft dollars may exist.

BlackRock may utilize certain electronic crossing networks (“ECNs”) (including, without limitation, ECNs in which BlackRock has an investment or other interest, to the extent permitted by applicable law) in executing client securities transactions for certain types of securities. These ECNs may charge fees for their services, including access fees and transaction fees. The transaction fees, which are similar to commissions or markups/markdowns, will generally be charged to clients and, like commissions and markups/markdowns, would generally be included in the cost of the securities purchased. Access fees may be paid by BlackRock even though incurred in connection with executing transactions on behalf of clients, including the Funds. In certain circumstances, ECNs may offer volume discounts that will reduce the access fees typically paid by BlackRock. BlackRock will only utilize ECNs consistent with its obligation to seek to obtain best execution in client transactions.

BlackRock owns a minority interest in, and is a member of, Members Exchange (“MEMX”), a newly created U.S. stock exchange. Transactions for a Fund may be executed on MEMX if third party brokers select MEMX as the appropriate venue for execution of orders placed by BlackRock traders on behalf of client portfolios.

BlackRock has adopted policies and procedures designed to prevent conflicts of interest from influencing proxy voting decisions that it makes on behalf of advisory clients, including the Funds, and to help ensure that such decisions are made in accordance with BlackRock’s fiduciary obligations to its clients. Nevertheless, notwithstanding such proxy voting policies and procedures, actual proxy voting decisions of BlackRock may have the effect of favoring the interests of other clients or businesses of other divisions or units of BlackRock, provided that BlackRock believes such voting decisions to be in accordance with its fiduciary obligations. For a more detailed discussion of these policies and procedures, see “Proxy Voting Policies and Procedures.”

It is also possible that, from time to time, BlackRock may, subject to compliance with applicable law, purchase and hold shares of a Fund. Increasing a Fund’s assets may enhance investment flexibility and diversification and may contribute to economies of scale that tend to reduce the Fund’s expense ratio. BlackRock reserves the right, subject to compliance with applicable law, to redeem at any time some or all of the shares of a Fund acquired for its own accounts. A large redemption of shares of a Fund by BlackRock could significantly reduce the asset size of the Fund, which might have an adverse effect on the Fund’s investment flexibility, portfolio diversification and expense ratio. BlackRock seeks to consider the effect of redemptions on a Fund and other shareholders in deciding whether to redeem its shares but is not obligated to do so and may elect not to do so.

It is possible that a Fund may invest in securities of, or engage in transactions with, companies in which BlackRock has significant debt or equity investments or other interests. A Fund may also invest in issuances (such as structured notes) by entities for which BlackRock provides and is compensated for cash management services relating to the proceeds from the sale of such issuances. In making investment decisions for a Fund,

BlackRock is not permitted to obtain or use material non-public information acquired by any unit of BlackRock, in the course of these activities. In addition, from time to time, the activities of BlackRock may limit a Fund’s flexibility in purchases and sales of securities. As indicated below, BlackRock may engage in transactions with companies in which BlackRock-advised funds or other clients of BlackRock have an investment.

BlackRock and its personnel and other financial service providers may have interests in promoting sales of the Funds. With respect to BlackRock and its personnel, the remuneration and profitability relating to services to and sales of the Funds or other products may be greater than remuneration and profitability relating to services to and sales of certain funds or other products that might be provided or offered. BlackRock and its sales personnel may directly or indirectly receive a portion of the fees and commissions charged to the Funds or their shareholders. BlackRock and its advisory or other personnel may also benefit from increased amounts of assets under management. Fees and commissions may also be higher than for other products or services, and the remuneration and profitability to BlackRock and such personnel resulting from transactions on behalf of or management of the Funds may be greater than the remuneration and profitability resulting from other funds or products.

BlackRock may provide valuation assistance to certain clients with respect to certain securities or other investments and the valuation recommendations made for such clients’ accounts may differ from the valuations for the same securities or investments assigned by a Fund’s pricing vendors, especially if such valuations are based on broker-dealer quotes or other data sources unavailable to the Fund’s pricing vendors. While BlackRock will generally communicate its valuation information or determinations to a Fund’s pricing vendors and/or fund accountants, there may be instances where the Fund’s pricing vendors or fund accountants assign a different valuation to a security or other investment than the valuation for such security or investment determined or recommended by BlackRock.

As disclosed in more detail in “Determination of Net Asset Value” in this SAI, when market quotations are not readily available or are believed by BlackRock to be unreliable, a Fund’s investments are valued at fair value by BlackRock. BlackRock has been designated as the Fund’s valuation designee pursuant to Rule 2a-5 under the Investment Company Act and acts through BlackRock’s Rule 2a-5 Committee (the “2a-5 Committee”), with assistance from other BlackRock pricing committees and in accordance with BlackRock’s policies and procedures (the “Valuation Procedures”). When determining a “fair value price,” the 2a-5 Committee seeks to determine the price that a Fund might reasonably expect to receive from the current sale of that asset or liability in an arm’s-length transaction. The price generally may not be determined based on what a Fund might reasonably expect to receive for selling an asset or liability at a later time or if it holds the asset or liability to maturity. While fair value determinations will be based upon all available factors that BlackRock deems relevant at the time of the determination, and may be based on analytical values determined by BlackRock using proprietary or third party valuation models, fair value represents only a good faith approximation of the value of an asset or liability. The fair value of one or more assets or liabilities may not, in retrospect, be the price at which those assets or liabilities could have been sold during the period in which the particular fair values were used in determining a Fund’s NAV. As a result, a Fund’s sale or redemption of its shares at NAV, at a time when a holding or holdings are valued by the 2a-5 Committee at fair value, may have the effect of diluting or increasing the economic interest of existing shareholders and may affect the amount of revenue received by BlackRock with respect to services for which it receives an asset-based fee.

To the extent permitted by applicable law, a Fund may invest all or some of its short term cash investments in any money market fund or similarly-managed private fund advised or managed by BlackRock. In connection with any such investments, a Fund, to the extent permitted by the Investment Company Act, may pay its share of expenses of a money market fund or other similarly-managed private fund in which it invests, which may result in a Fund bearing some additional expenses.

BlackRock and its directors, officers and employees, may buy and sell securities or other investments for their own accounts and may have conflicts of interest with respect to investments made on behalf of a Fund. As a

result of differing trading and investment strategies or constraints, positions may be taken by directors, officers and employees of BlackRock that are the same, different from or made at different times than positions taken for the Fund. To lessen the possibility that a Fund will be adversely affected by this personal trading, the Funds, BRIL and BlackRock each have adopted a Code of Ethics in compliance with Section 17(j) of the Investment Company Act that restricts securities trading in the personal accounts of investment professionals and others who normally come into possession of information regarding the Fund’s portfolio transactions. Each Code of Ethics is also available on the EDGAR Database on the Commission’s Internet site at http://www.sec.gov, and copies may be obtained, after paying a duplicating fee, by e-mail at [email protected].

BlackRock will not purchase securities or other property from, or sell securities or other property to, a Fund, except that the Fund may in accordance with rules or guidance adopted under the Investment Company Act engage in transactions with another Fund or accounts that are affiliated with the Fund as a result of common officers, directors, or investment advisers or pursuant to exemptive orders granted to the Funds and/or BlackRock by the Commission. These transactions would be effected in circumstances in which BlackRock determined that it would be appropriate for the Fund to purchase and another client of BlackRock to sell, or the Fund to sell and another client of BlackRock to purchase, the same security or instrument on the same day. From time to time, the activities of a Fund may be restricted because of regulatory requirements applicable to BlackRock and/or BlackRock’s internal policies designed to comply with, limit the applicability of, or otherwise relate to such requirements. A client not advised by BlackRock would not be subject to some of those considerations. There may be periods when BlackRock may not initiate or recommend certain types of transactions, or may otherwise restrict or limit its advice in certain securities or instruments issued by or related to companies for which BlackRock is performing advisory or other services or has proprietary positions. For example, when BlackRock is engaged to provide advisory or risk management services for a company, BlackRock may be prohibited from or limited in purchasing or selling securities of that company on behalf of a Fund, particularly where such services result in BlackRock obtaining material non-public information about the company (e.g., in connection with participation in a creditors’ committee). Similar situations could arise if personnel of BlackRock serve as directors of companies the securities of which the Funds wish to purchase or sell. However, if permitted by applicable law, and where consistent with BlackRock’s policies and procedures (including the necessary implementation of appropriate information barriers), the Funds may purchase securities or instruments that are issued by such companies, are the subject of an advisory or risk management assignment by BlackRock, or where personnel of BlackRock are directors or officers of the issuer.

The investment activities of BlackRock for its proprietary accounts and for client accounts may also limit the investment strategies and rights of the Funds. For example, in certain circumstances where the Funds invest in securities issued by companies that operate in certain regulated industries, in certain emerging or international markets, or are subject to corporate or regulatory ownership restrictions, or invest in certain futures and derivative transactions, there may be limits on the aggregate amount invested by BlackRock for its proprietary accounts and for client accounts (including the Funds) that may not be exceeded without the grant of a license or other regulatory or corporate consent, or, if exceeded, may cause BlackRock, the Funds or other client accounts to suffer disadvantages or business restrictions. If certain aggregate ownership thresholds are reached or certain transactions undertaken, the ability of BlackRock on behalf of clients (including the Funds) to purchase or dispose of investments, or exercise rights or undertake business transactions, may be restricted by regulation or otherwise impaired. As a result, BlackRock on behalf of its clients (including the Funds) may limit purchases, sell existing investments, or otherwise restrict, forgo or limit the exercise of rights (including transferring, outsourcing or limiting voting rights or forgoing the right to receive dividends) when BlackRock, in its sole discretion, deems it appropriate in light of potential regulatory or other restrictions on ownership or other consequences resulting from reaching investment thresholds.

In those circumstances where ownership thresholds or limitations must be observed, BlackRock seeks to allocate limited investment opportunities equitably among clients (including the Funds), taking into consideration benchmark weight and investment strategy. When ownership in certain securities nears an

applicable threshold, BlackRock may limit purchases in such securities to the issuer’s weighting in the applicable benchmark used by BlackRock to manage the Fund. If client (including Fund) holdings of an issuer exceed an applicable threshold and BlackRock is unable to obtain relief to enable the continued holding of such investments, it may be necessary to sell down these positions to meet the applicable limitations. In these cases, benchmark overweight positions will be sold prior to benchmark positions being reduced to meet applicable limitations.

In addition to the foregoing, other ownership thresholds may trigger reporting requirements to governmental and regulatory authorities, and such reports may entail the disclosure of the identity of a client or BlackRock’s intended strategy with respect to such security or asset.

BlackRock may maintain securities indices. To the extent permitted by applicable laws, the Funds may seek to license and use such indices as part of their investment strategy. Index based funds that seek to track the performance of securities indices also may use the name of the index or index provider in the fund name. Index providers, including BlackRock (to the extent permitted by applicable law), may be paid licensing fees for use of their index or index name. BlackRock is not obligated to license its indices to any Fund and the Funds are under no obligation to use BlackRock indices. Any Fund that enters into a license for a BlackRock index cannot be assured that the terms of any index licensing agreement with BlackRock will be as favorable as those terms offered to other licensees.

BlackRock may not serve as an Authorized Participant in the creation and redemption of BlackRock-advised ETFs.

BlackRock may enter into contractual arrangements with third-party service providers to the Fund (e.g., custodians, administrators and index providers) pursuant to which BlackRock receives fee discounts or concessions in recognition of BlackRock’s overall relationship with such service providers. To the extent that BlackRock is responsible for paying these service providers out of its management fee, the benefits of any such fee discounts or concessions may accrue, in whole or in part, to BlackRock.

BlackRock owns or has an ownership interest in certain trading, portfolio management, operations and/or information systems used by Fund service providers. These systems are, or will be, used by a Fund service provider in connection with the provision of services to accounts managed by BlackRock and funds managed and sponsored by BlackRock, including the Funds, that engage the service provider (typically the custodian). A Fund’s service provider remunerates BlackRock for the use of the systems. A Fund service provider’s payments to BlackRock for the use of these systems may enhance the profitability of BlackRock.

BlackRock’s receipt of fees from a service provider in connection with the use of systems provided by BlackRock may create an incentive for BlackRock to recommend that a Fund enter into or renew an arrangement with the service provider.

In recognition of a BlackRock client’s overall relationship with BlackRock, BlackRock may offer special pricing arrangements for certain services provided by BlackRock. Any such special pricing arrangements will not affect Fund fees and expenses applicable to such client’s investment in a Fund.

Present and future activities of BlackRock and its directors, officers and employees, in addition to those described in this section, may give rise to additional conflicts of interest.

To the knowledge of the Trust, the following owned of record or beneficially 5% or more of a class of the specified Fund’s shares as of April 3, 2023:

For purposes of the 1940 Act, any person who owns directly or through one or more controlled companies more than 25% of the voting securities of a company is presumed to “control” such company. Accordingly, to the extent that a shareholder identified in the foregoing table is identified as the beneficial holder of more than 25% of a Fund, or is identified as the holder of record of more than 25% of a Fund and has voting and/or investment powers, such shareholder may be presumed to control such Fund.

Investment Adviser. The Funds are feeder funds in a master/feeder structure. As a result each Fund invests all of its assets in a related Master Portfolio of MIP. The Master Portfolios have retained BFA as the investment adviser to manage their assets.

BFA has entered into a sub-advisory agreement with BlackRock International Limited (“BIL” or the “Sub-Adviser”), pursuant to which BFA pays the Sub-Adviser for providing services to BFA, with respect to that portion of Money Market Master Portfolio for which it acts as sub-adviser, a monthly fee at an annual rate equal to a percentage of the management fee paid to BFA under the investment advisory agreement with respect to Money Market Master Portfolio.

Advisory Fees. BFA is entitled to receive monthly fees at the annual rate of 0.10% of each Master Portfolio’s average daily net assets. From time to time, BFA may waive such fees in whole or in part. Any such waiver will reduce the expenses of each Master Portfolio and, accordingly, have a favorable impact on its performance. BFA has contractually agreed to waive a portion of its management fees and accept payment at an annual rate of 0.07% through June 30, 2024 with respect to each Master Portfolio. Pursuant to the investment advisory contract between BFA and MIP on behalf of the Master Portfolios (“Advisory Contract”), BFA furnishes MIP’s Board of Trustees with periodic reports on the investment strategy and performance of the Master Portfolios.

The Advisory Contract is subject to annual approval by (i) MIP’s Board of Trustees or (ii) the vote of a majority (as defined in the 1940 Act) of the outstanding voting interests of such Master Portfolio, provided that in either event the continuance also is approved by a majority of MIP’s Independent Trustees, by a vote cast in person at a meeting called for the purpose of voting on such approval. The Advisory Contract is terminable without penalty, on 60 days’ written notice, by either party. The Advisory Contract will terminate automatically, as to the relevant Master Portfolio, in the event of its assignment (as defined in the 1940 Act).

For the past three fiscal years, the related Master Portfolio of each Fund paid to BFA the following management fees, net of waivers and/or offsetting credits:

For the past three fiscal years, BFA waived the following management fees with respect to the Master Portfolios in which the Funds invest:

The fees and expenses of the Independent Trustees of MIP, counsel to the Independent Trustees of MIP, and the independent registered public accounting firm that provides audit services in connection with the Master Portfolios (collectively referred to as the “MIP Independent Expenses”) are paid directly by the Master Portfolios. Each of BAL and BFA, as applicable, has contractually undertaken to reimburse or provide an offsetting credit to each Master Portfolio for such MIP Independent Expenses through June 30, 2024.

For the past three fiscal years, BFA provided an offsetting credit for MIP Independent Expenses, in the amounts shown, against management fees paid by the Master Portfolios in which the Funds invest:

Administrator. The Trust has engaged BAL to provide certain administration services to the Funds. Pursuant to an Administration Agreement with the Trust, BAL and its affiliates provide as administration services, among other things: supervision of the administrative operation of the Trust and the Funds, provision of management reporting and treasury administration services, financial reporting, legal and tax services, and preparation of proxy statements and shareholder reports for the Funds. BAL and its affiliates also furnish office space and certain facilities required for conducting the business of the Trust together with all other administrative services that are not being furnished by BFA. BAL and its affiliates also pay the compensation of the Trust’s Trustees who are not Independent Trustees and of officers and employees who are affiliated with the Trust. For providing such services, BAL is entitled to a monthly fee at an annual rate of 0.02% of each Fund’s average daily net assets attributable to SL Agency Shares.

BAL has agreed to bear all costs of the Master Portfolios’ and MIP’s operations, other than brokerage expenses, management fees, distribution plan expenses, MIP Independent Expenses, litigation expenses, taxes or other extraordinary expenses. Expenses attributable only to the Master Portfolios will be charged only against the assets of the Master Portfolios. General expenses of MIP will be allocated among its portfolios in a manner that is proportionate to the net assets of each Master Portfolio, on a transactional basis as the Board of Trustees deems equitable.

BAL is not entitled to compensation for providing administration services to a Master Portfolio for so long as BAL is entitled to compensation for providing administration services to the Fund that invests substantially all of its assets in the Master Portfolio, or BAL or an affiliate receives management fees from the Master Portfolio. Each Fund having multiple classes allocates all expenses of the Master Portfolio, including the Master Portfolio’s management fee, to each share class in proportion to the aggregate net asset value of such class as compared to all classes of the Fund in accordance with the Fund’s multi-class plan under Rule 18f-3 under the 1940 Act.

For the past three fiscal years, the Funds paid the following administration fees to BAL, net of waivers and/or offsetting credits:

For the past three fiscal years, BAL waived the following administration fees with respect to the Funds:

The fees and expenses of the Independent Trustees of the Trust, counsel to the Independent Trustees of the Trust, and the independent registered public accounting firm that provides audit services in connection with the Funds (collectively referred to as the “Independent Expenses”) are paid directly by the Funds. Each of BAL and BFA, as applicable, has contractually undertaken to reimburse or provide an offsetting credit to the Funds for such Independent Expenses through June 30, 2024.

For the past three fiscal years, BAL provided an offsetting credit, in the amounts shown, against administration fees paid with respect to the Funds:

Distributor. BlackRock Investments, LLC (previously defined as the “Distributor”) is the distributor for the Funds’ shares. The Distributor is a registered broker-dealer located at 50 Hudson Yards, New York, NY 10001.

Each Fund has entered into a distribution agreement with the Distributor in connection with the continuous offering of shares of the Fund (the “Distribution Agreement”). The Distribution Agreement obligates the Distributor to pay certain expenses in connection with the offering of shares of the Funds. After the prospectuses, statements of additional information and periodic reports have been prepared, set in type and mailed to shareholders, the Distributor pays for the printing and distribution of these documents used in connection with the offering to dealers and investors. The Distributor also pays for other supplementary sales literature and advertising costs.

Other Payments by the Fund. In addition to shareholder servicing fees that a Fund may pay to Shareholder Servicing Agents of the Fund pursuant to a Shareholder Servicing Plan and fees a Fund pays to its transfer agent, BFA, on behalf of a Fund, may enter into non-Plan agreements with affiliated and unaffiliated brokers, dealers, financial institutions, insurance companies, retirement plan record-keepers and other financial intermediaries (including BlackRock, BRIL and their affiliates, and entities that may also be serving as distribution agents or Shareholder Servicing Agents of the Fund) (collectively, “Service Organizations”) pursuant to which the Fund will pay a Service Organization for administrative, networking, recordkeeping, sub-transfer agency, sub-accounting and/or shareholder services. These non-Plan payments are generally based on either (1) a percentage of the average daily net assets of Fund shareholders serviced by a Service Organization or (2) a fixed dollar amount for each account serviced by a Service Organization. The aggregate amount of these payments may be substantial.

Additional Payments by BlackRock. From time to time, BlackRock, BRIL and/or their affiliates (referred to in this section collectively as “BlackRock”) may compensate Service Organizations for the sale and distribution of shares of a Fund, for services to a Fund and its shareholders and/or for data provision or technology support. A Service Organization may perform these obligations itself or may arrange for a third party to perform them. These payments, which are not made pursuant to a Shareholder Servicing Plan or distribution plan or otherwise paid by a Fund, are referred to as “Additional Payments” herein.

Additional Payments are made from BlackRock’s own assets (which may come directly or indirectly from fees paid by a Fund to BlackRock for various services, such as investment advisory services). These payments are not an additional charge to a Fund or its shareholders and do not change the price paid by shareholders for the purchase of a Fund’s shares or the amount a Fund receives as proceeds from such purchases. Additional Payments made to Service Organizations are in addition to any distribution or shareholder servicing fees paid under any Plan of any Fund, any sales charges, commissions or other concessions described in the Prospectuses or this SAI, and any administrative, networking, recordkeeping, sub-transfer agency or sub-accounting fees payable by a Fund. Pursuant to applicable FINRA regulations, the details of certain of these payments, including the Service Organizations receiving such payments in connection with the sale and distribution of Fund shares, are required to be disclosed. While FINRA regulations limit the sales charges that shareholders may bear, there are no limits with regard to the amounts that BlackRock may pay out of its own assets.

Additional Payments may be made as a fixed dollar amount, may be based on the number of customer accounts maintained by a Service Organization, may be based on a percentage of the value of shares sold to, or held by, customers of the Service Organization involved, or may be calculated on another basis.

BlackRock negotiates Additional Payments with each Service Organization on an individual basis. Additional Payments may be different for different Service Organizations, and some Service Organizations may be paid pursuant to more than one of the calculations described above. Not all Service Organizations receive Additional Payments. Sales-based payments primarily create incentives to make new sales of shares of the Fund, and asset-based payments primarily create incentives to retain previously sold shares of the Fund. The level of payments made to these Service Organizations in any year will vary and may be limited to specific Funds or share classes. In certain cases, these payments may be subject to certain minimum payment levels.

The aggregate amount of Additional Payments made by BlackRock may be substantial and may be significant to certain Service Organizations. The categories of Additional Payments listed below are not mutually exclusive. The same Service Organization, or one or more of its affiliates, may receive payments under more than one category of Additional Payments.

Additional Payments may be made by BlackRock for distribution and marketing support activities. These payments may take the form of, among other things, “due diligence” payments for a Service Organization’s examination of a Fund; payments for providing extra employee training and information relating to a Fund; fees for access (in some cases on a preferential basis) to the Service Organization’s registered representatives, salespersons or other personnel, including at sales meetings and conferences; “shelf space” payments for placing the Fund on the Service Organization’s platform(s); “listing” fees for the placing of the Fund on a dealer’s list (which may be a preferred or recommended list) of mutual funds available for purchase by its customers or in certain sales programs from time to time; fees for providing assistance in promoting the sale of the Fund’s shares (which may include promotions in communications with the Service Organization’s customers, registered representatives, salespersons and/or other personnel); payments for the sale of shares and/or the maintenance of share balances; transaction fees (also referred to as “ticket charges”); and payments for infrastructure support. These payments normally will not exceed the sum of (a) 0.25% of such year’s Fund sales by that Service Organization, and (b) 0.21% of the assets attributable to that Service Organization invested in a Fund.

Many Fund shares are owned or held by Service Organizations for the benefit of their customers. In these situations, a Fund may not maintain accounts in the name of the customers, and Service Organizations may perform some of the functions for these customers’ accounts that the transfer agent would have performed if the accounts had been in the customers’ names on the Fund’s books. Such services include sub-accounting services, shareholder servicing and transaction processing services and are sometimes referred to as “recordkeeping,” “sub-transfer agency,” “sub-accounting,” “networking” and/or “administrative” services. Additional Payments may exceed amounts that would be earned on these assets by the transfer agent for the performance of these or similar services. These Additional Payments made by BlackRock are in addition to any transfer agent, shareholder servicing and transaction processing fees paid by a Fund, as applicable.

BlackRock may make Additional Payments to Service Organizations for the provision of certain analytical or other data services relating to the Funds, such as statistical information regarding sales of the Funds, or technology support. Such Additional Payments are generally made as a fixed dollar amount, and not based on assets or sales.

As of the date of this SAI, the Service Organizations listed below, and, in some cases, certain of the Service Organization’s affiliates, may be receiving one or more types of Additional Payments. This list may change over time, and BlackRock may pay Service Organizations or their affiliates additional types of Additional

Payments in the future. Please contact your Service Organization to determine whether it or its affiliate currently may be receiving such payments and to obtain further information regarding any such payments.

AccuTech Systems Corporation

ADP Broker-Dealer, Inc.

Advisor Credit Exchange, LLC

Advisor Group, Inc.

Alight Solutions LLC

Allianz Life Financial Services, LLC

Allianz Life Insurance Company of New York

Allianz Life Insurance Company of North America

American Enterprise Investment Services, Inc.

American General Life Insurance Company

American United Life Insurance Company

Annuity Investors Life Insurance Company

Ascensus Broker Dealer Services, Inc.

Ascensus, Inc.

Avantax Investment Services, LLC

Bancroft Capital LLC

Bank of America, N.A.

Bank of New York Mellon

Barclays Capital Inc.

Benefit Plans Administrative Services, Inc.

Benefit Trust Company

Beta Capital Securities LLC

BlackRock Advisors, LLC

BMO Capital Markets Corp.

BNP Paribas Investment Partners UK Limited

BNY Mellon, N.A.

BofA Securities, Inc.

BOKF, N.A.

Brighthouse Life Insurance Company

Brighthouse Life Insurance Company of NY

Broadridge Business Process Outsourcing, LLC

Brown Brothers Harriman & Co.

Cabrera Capital Markets, LLC

Cadaret Grant & Co., Inc.

Capital One, N.A.

Cetera Advisor Networks LLC

Cetera Advisors LLC

Cetera Financial Group

Cetera Financial Specialists LLC

Cetera Investment Services LLC

CF Secured, LLC

Charles Schwab & Co., Inc.

Charles Schwab Trust Bank

Chicago Mercantile Exchange Inc.

CIM Investment Management, Inc.

Citco Securities, LLC

CitiBank, National Association

Citigroup Global Markets, Inc.

Citizens Bank

Citizens Business Bank

CME Shareholder Servicing LLC

CMFG Life Insurance Company

Comerica Bank

Commonwealth Financial Network

Computershare Trust Company

Conduent HR Services, LLC

CSC Trust Company of Delaware

CUSO Financial Services, L.P.

Delaware Life Insurance Company

Delaware Life Insurance Company of New York

Deutsche Bank AG

Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas

Digital Retirement Solutions, Inc.

Dunham & Associates Investment Counsel, Inc.

Edward D. Jones & Co., L.P.

Empire Fidelity Investments Life Insurance Company

Empower Annuity Insurance Company of America

Empower Financial Services, Inc.

Empower Life & Annuity Insurance Company of New York

Empower Plan Services, LLC

Envestnet Asset Management, Inc.

Equitable Advisors, LLC

Equitable Life Insurance Company

E*trade Savings Bank

Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation

Fidelity Brokerage Services LLC

Fidelity Investments Institutional Operations Company, Inc.

Fidelity Investments Life Insurance Company

Fifth Third Securities, Inc.

First Allied Securities, Inc.

First Command Financial Planning, Inc.

First Hawaiian Bank

First Republic Bank

First Security Benefit Life Insurance and Annuity Company of New York

First Symetra National Life Insurance Company of New York

FIS Brokerage & Securities Services LLC

Forethought Life Insurance Company

FSC Securities Corporation

Genworth Life and Annuity Insurance Company

Genworth Life Insurance Company of New York

Global Atlantic Distributors, LLC

Goldman Sachs & Co.

Great Pacific Securities, LLC

Guardian Insurance & Annuity Co., Inc.

Hancock Whitney Bank

Hartford Funds Management Company

Hartford Securities Distribution Company, Inc.

Hazeltree Fund Services, Inc.

Hightower Securities, Inc.

Hilltop Securities Inc.

HSBC Bank USA, N.A.

Huntington Securities, Inc.

Institutional Cash Distributors, LLC

Integrity Life Insurance Company

Investment Trust of California

J.P. Morgan Institutional Investments Inc

J.P. Morgan Securities LLC

Jefferies LLC

Jefferson National Life Insurance Company

Jefferson National Life Insurance Company of New York

John Hancock Life Insurance Company (U.S.A.)

John Hancock Life Insurance Company of New York

John Hancock Trust Company

JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A.

Kestra Investment Services, LLC

Lincoln Financial Advisors Corporation

Lincoln Financial Securities Corporation

Lincoln Life & Annuity Company of New York

Lincoln National Life Insurance Company

Lincoln Retirement Services LLC

Lombard International Life Assurance Company

LPL Financial LLC

M&T Securities Inc.

Manufacturers and Traders Trust Company

Massachusetts Mutual Life Insurance Company

Members Life Insurance Company

Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith Incorporated

Metavante Corporation

Metropolitan Life Insurance Company

Mid Atlantic Clearing & Settlement Corporation

Midland Life Insurance Company

Minnesota Life Insurance Company

Mischler Financial Group

Mizuho Securities USA Inc.

MML Distributors, LLC

MML Investors Services, LLC

Morgan Stanley & Co. LLC

Morgan Stanley Distribution, Inc.

Morgan Stanley Smith Barney LLC

MUFG Union Bank, National Association

National Financial Services LLC

National Integrity Life Insurance Company

National Life Insurance Company

Nationwide Financial Services, Inc.

Nationwide Fund Distributors LLC

Nationwide Retirement Solutions

NCB Federal Savings Bank

New England Pension Plan Systems, LLC

New York Life Insurance and Annuity Corporation

Newport Retirement Services, Inc.

NEXT Financial Group, Inc.

Northbrook Bank & Trust Company

Northern Trust Company

Northwestern Mutual Investment Services, LLC

NYLife Distributors LLC

Oppenheimer & Co., Inc.

Orion Advisor Services, LLC

Pacific Life & Annuity Company

Pacific Life Insurance Company

Pacific Select Distributors, LLC

Park Avenue Securities LLC

Penserra Securities, LLC

Pershing LLC

PFPC Inc.

Piper Jaffray & Co.

PNC Bank, National Association

PNC Capital Markets LLC

PNC Investments LLC

Principal Bank

Principal Life Insurance Company

Protective Life and Annuity Insurance Company

Protective Life Insurance Company

Pruco Life Insurance Company

Pruco Life Insurance Company of New Jersey

Prudential Annuities Distributors, Inc.

Prudential Insurance Company of America

Raymond James & Associates, Inc.

Raymond James Financial Services, Inc.

RBC Capital Markets, LLC

Regions Bank

Reliance Trust Company

Reliastar Life Insurance Company

Reliastar Life Insurance Company of New York

RiverSource Distributors, Inc.

RiverSource Life Insurance Co. of New York

RiverSource Life Insurance Company

Royal Alliance Associates, Inc.

SagePoint Financial, Inc.

Sammons Retirement Solutions, Inc.

Santander Bank, N.A.

Saturna Trust Company

Securities America, Inc.

Securities Finance Trust Company

Security Benefit Life Insurance Company

Security Financial Resources, Inc.

Security Life of Denver Insurance Company

SEI Private Trust Company

SG Americas Securities, LLC

Silicon Valley Bank

Sorrento Pacific Financial LLC

Standard Insurance Company

State Farm Life and Accident Assurance Company

State Farm Life Insurance Company

State Farm VP Management Corp.

State Street Bank and Trust Company

State Street Global Markets, LLC

Stern Brothers & Co.

Stifel, Nicolaus & Company, Incorporated

Summit Brokerage Services, Inc.

SVB Asset Management

Symetra Life Insurance Company

Syntal Capital Partners, LLC

T. Rowe Price Retirement Plan Services, Inc.

Talcott Resolution Life and Annuity Insurance Company

Talcott Resolution Life Insurance Company

TD Ameritrade Clearing, Inc.

TD Ameritrade, Inc.

TD Prime Services (US) LLC

Teachers Insurance and Annuity Association of America

TMI Trust Company

Tigress Financial Partners, LLC

Transamerica Financial Life Insurance Company

Transamerica Life Insurance Company

Treasury Brokerage

Triad Advisors, LLC

Truist Bank

U.S. Bancorp Investments, Inc.

U.S. Bank, National Association

UBATCO & Co.

UBS Financial Services, Inc.

UBS Securities LLC

Ultimus Fund Solutions, LLC

UMB Bank, National Association

United States Life Insurance Company in the City of New York

VALIC Retirement Services Company

Vanguard Group, Inc.

Vanguard Marketing Corporation

Voya Financial Advisors, Inc.

Voya Financial Partners, LLC

Voya Institutional Plan Services, LLC

Voya Insurance and Annuity Company

Voya Investments Distributor, LLC

Voya Retirement Insurance and Annuity Company

Waddell & Reed, Inc.

Wells Fargo Advisors, LLC

Wells Fargo Advisors Financial Network, LLC

Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.

Wells Fargo Clearing Services, LLC

Wells Fargo Investments, LLC

Wells Fargo Securities, LLC

Wilmington Trust, National Association

Woodbury Financial Services, Inc.

ZB, National Association

In addition to the Additional Payments described above, BlackRock may contribute to various other incentive arrangements to promote the sale of shares, including hosting proprietary and financially sponsoring Service Organizations’ training and educational seminars, conferences, meetings or events. BlackRock may also pay for the travel, meal, lodging and other expenses of Service Organizations and their salespersons or other personnel in connection with educational and sales promotional programs. This compensation is not included in, and is made in addition to, the Additional Payments described above. These payments may be made directly to the Service Organizations or their affiliates, or to a third party vendor, and may vary depending upon the nature of the event or the relationship and are subject to applicable laws and regulations, including the rules of applicable self-regulatory organizations, such as FINRA. BlackRock may pay Service Organizations additional types of incentive compensation in the future to the extent not prohibited by applicable laws or regulations.

Separately, BlackRock has developed proprietary tools, calculators and related interactive or digital content that is made available through the www.BlackRock.com website at no additional cost to Service Organizations. BlackRock configures these tools and calculators and localizes the content for Service Organizations as part of its customary digital marketing support and promotion of the Funds or other BlackRock funds, iShares ETFs and other exchange-traded products.

Additional Payments made by BlackRock to a Service Organization or its affiliates or other incentive arrangements may be an important factor in the Service Organization’s willingness to support the sale of a Fund and/or particular share class through its distribution system or to perform services with respect to such Fund. Additional Payments and other incentive arrangements may also be important factors in the Service Organization’s willingness to recommend the BlackRock Fund Complex in general.

BlackRock may be motivated to pay Additional Payments and other incentive compensation to promote the sale of Fund shares to customers of Service Organizations and the retention of those investments by such customers. To the extent Service Organizations sell more shares of a Fund or retain shares of a Fund in their customers’ accounts, BlackRock benefits from the incremental management and other fees paid by the Fund with respect to those assets.

Service Organizations may have financial incentives for recommending a particular Fund, share class or fund complex over another. Service Organizations may charge their customers additional fees in connection with the purchase or redemption of Fund shares or for account-related services which are in addition to the sales and other charges described in the Fund’s Prospectus and this SAI. Such charges may vary among Service Organizations but in all cases will be retained by the Service Organization and will not be remitted to a Fund or BlackRock.

Shareholders should consider whether such incentives exist when evaluating any recommendations from a Service Organization to purchase or sell shares of a Fund and when considering which share class is most appropriate. You should consult with your Service Organization, and review carefully any disclosure by the Service Organization, as to compensation received by it or its affiliates and for more information about the payments described above.

Accounting Services Provider. State Street Bank and Trust Company (“State Street”) serves as the accounting services provider for the Master Portfolios. State Street maintains the books of account and other financial records (other than those maintained by the Master Portfolios’ custodian); records general ledger entries; calculates daily net income; reconciles activity to the trial balance; calculates and publishes daily net asset value; prepares account balances; and provides such other accounting services as may be required. In connection with its accounting services, State Street also provides certain administration services.

The table below shows the amounts paid by BFA to State Street on behalf of the Master Portfolios for accounting services for the past three fiscal years:

Custodian. State Street has been retained to act as custodian for the Funds and the Master Portfolios and is located at One Lincoln Street, Boston, Massachusetts 02111. The custodian, among other responsibilities, maintains a custody account or accounts in the name of the Funds and the Master Portfolios; receives and delivers all assets for each Fund and each Master Portfolio upon purchase and upon sale or maturity, and collects and receives all income and other payments and distributions on account of the assets of the Funds and the Master Portfolios.

Transfer and Dividend Disbursing Agent. State Street, located at 1776 Heritage Drive, JAB/3, North Quincy, MA 02171, attn: Quincy Nunnally-Transfer Agency, has also been retained to act as the transfer and dividend

disbursing agent for the Funds and the Master Portfolios. For its services as transfer and dividend disbursing agent to the Funds and the Master Portfolios, State Street is paid fees based on the Funds’ and the Master Portfolios’ net assets. State Street is entitled to be reimbursed for out-of-pocket expenses or advances incurred by it in performing its obligations under the Transfer Agency Agreement. BAL has agreed to pay these fees and expenses pursuant to its Administration Agreement with the Trust. In addition, the Transfer Agency Agreement contemplates that State Street will be reimbursed for other expenses incurred by it at the request or with the written consent of the Funds, including, without limitation, any equipment or supplies that the Trust specifically orders or requires State Street to order.

Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm. The Audit Committee of the Trust, which is comprised solely of non-interested Trustees, has selected an independent registered public accounting firm for the Funds that audits the Funds’ financial statements. Please see the inside back cover page of your Fund’s Prospectus for information on your Fund’s independent registered public accounting firm.

Counsel. Sidley Austin LLP, with offices at 787 Seventh Avenue, New York, New York 10019, serves as the Funds’ counsel.

Pursuant to Rule 2a-7, the Funds must maintain a dollar-weighted average portfolio maturity of 60 days or less and a dollar-weighted average life of 120 days or less, purchase securities having remaining maturities (as defined in Rule 2a-7) of 397 calendar days or less, and invest only in those high-quality securities that are determined by the Investment Adviser to be “eligible securities” under Rule 2a-7. The maturity of an instrument is generally deemed to be the period remaining until the date when the principal amount thereof is due or the date on which the instrument is to be redeemed. However, Rule 2a-7 provides that the maturity of an instrument may be deemed shorter in the case of certain instruments, including certain variable-rate and floating-rate instruments subject to demand features.

BlackRock Cash Funds: Treasury’s Master Portfolio uses the amortized cost method to determine the value of its respective securities pursuant to Rule 2a-7 under the 1940 Act. The amortized cost method involves valuing a security at its cost and amortizing any discount or premium over the period until maturity, regardless of the impact of fluctuating interest rates on the market value of the security. While this method provides certainty in valuation, it may result in periods during which the value, as determined by amortized cost, is higher or lower than the price that BlackRock Cash Funds: Treasury would receive if the security were sold. During these periods the yield to a shareholder may differ somewhat from that which could be obtained from a similar fund that uses a method of valuation based upon market prices. Thus, during periods of declining interest rates, if the use of the amortized cost method results in a lower value of BlackRock Cash Funds: Treasury’s portfolio on a particular day, a prospective investor in the Fund would be able to obtain a somewhat higher yield than would result from making an investment in the Fund using solely market values, and existing BlackRock Cash Funds: Treasury shareholders would receive correspondingly less income. The converse would apply during periods of rising interest rates.

Pursuant to Rule 2a-7, the Board is required to establish procedures designed to stabilize, to the extent reasonably possible, BlackRock Cash Funds: Treasury’s price per share as computed for the purpose of sales and redemptions at $1.00. Such procedures include review of BlackRock Cash Funds: Treasury’s portfolio holdings, at least daily, and at such other intervals as the Board of Trustees deems appropriate, to determine whether a Fund’s net asset value per share as determined by using available market quotations (or an appropriate substitute which reflects current market conditions) deviates from $1.00 per share based on amortized cost. The extent of any deviation will be examined by the Board of Trustees. If such deviation exceeds 1/2 of 1%, the Board will promptly consider what action, if any, will be initiated. In the event the Board determines that a deviation exists that may result in material dilution or other unfair results to shareholders, the Board will take such corrective action as it regards as necessary and appropriate, such action

may include redeeming shares in-kind, selling portfolio securities prior to maturity, reducing or withholding dividends, shortening the average portfolio maturity, reducing the number of outstanding shares without monetary consideration, and utilizing a net asset value per share as determined by using available market quotations.

In computing the net asset value of its shares for purposes of sales and redemptions, BlackRock Cash Funds: Institutional’s Master Portfolio values its portfolio securities as described below and the Institutional Fund will quote its net asset value per share to the fourth decimal place (e.g., $1.0000), which net asset value per share is expected to fluctuate from time to time.

Valuation of assets held by BlackRock Cash Funds: Institutional’s Master Portfolio is performed as follows:

Fixed Income Investments. Fixed-income securities for which market quotations are readily available are generally valued using such securities’ current market value. BlackRock Cash Funds: Institutional’s Master Portfolio values fixed-income portfolio securities using the last available bid prices or current market quotations provided by dealers or prices (including evaluated prices) supplied by BlackRock Cash Funds: Institutional’s Master Portfolio’s approved independent third-party pricing services, each in accordance with the Valuation Procedures. The pricing services may use matrix pricing or valuation models that utilize certain inputs and assumptions to derive values, including transaction data (e.g., recent representative bids and offers), credit quality information, perceived market movements, news, and other relevant information and by other methods, which may include consideration of: yields or prices of securities of comparable quality, coupon, maturity and type; indications as to values from dealers; general market conditions; and/or other factors and assumptions. Pricing services generally value fixed-income securities assuming orderly transactions of an institutional round lot size, but BlackRock Cash Funds: Institutional’s Master Portfolio may hold or transact in such securities in smaller, odd lot sizes. Odd lots may trade at lower prices than institutional round lots. The amortized cost method of valuation may be used with respect to debt obligations with 60 days or less remaining to maturity unless such method does not represent fair value. Certain fixed-income investments, including asset-backed and mortgage related securities, may be valued based on valuation models that consider the estimated cash flows of each tranche of the issuer, establish a benchmark yield and develop an estimated tranche specific spread to the benchmark yield based on the unique attributes of the tranche.

Other Investment Companies. Shares of underlying open-end funds (including money market funds) are valued at NAV. Shares of underlying exchange-traded closed-end funds or other exchange-traded funds will be valued at their most recent closing price.

General Valuation Information. In determining the market value of portfolio investments, BlackRock Cash Funds: Institutional’s Master Portfolio may employ independent third party pricing services, which may use, without limitation, a matrix or formula method that takes into consideration market indexes, matrices, yield curves and other specified inputs and assumptions. This may result in the assets being valued at a price different from the price that would have been determined had the matrix or formula method not been used. The price BlackRock Cash Funds: Institutional’s Master Portfolio could receive upon the sale of any particular portfolio investment may differ from BlackRock Cash Funds: Institutional’s Master Portfolio’s valuation methodology or a price provided by an independent pricing service. As a result, the price received upon the sale of an investment may be less than the value ascribed by BlackRock Cash Funds: Institutional’s Master Portfolio, and BlackRock Cash Funds: Institutional’s Master Portfolio could realize a greater than expected loss or lesser than expected gain upon the sale of the investment. BlackRock Cash Funds: Institutional’s Master Portfolio’s ability to value its investments may also be impacted by technological issues and/or errors by pricing services or other third party service providers. All cash, receivables and current payables are carried on BlackRock Cash Funds: Institutional’s Master Portfolio’s books at their fair value.

Prices obtained from independent third party pricing services, broker-dealers or market makers to value BlackRock Cash Funds: Institutional’s Master Portfolio’s securities and other assets and liabilities are based on information available at the time BlackRock Cash Funds: Institutional’s Master Portfolio values its assets

and liabilities. In the event that a pricing service quotation is revised or updated subsequent to the day on which the BlackRock Cash Funds: Institutional’s Master Portfolio valued such security, the revised pricing service quotation generally will be applied prospectively. Such determination will be made considering pertinent facts and circumstances surrounding the revision.

In the event that application of the methods of valuation discussed above result in a price for a security which is deemed not to be representative of the fair market value of such security, the security will be valued by, under the direction of or in accordance with a method approved by BlackRock, BlackRock Cash Funds: Institutional’s Master Portfolio’s valuation designee, as reflecting fair value. All other assets and liabilities (including securities for which market quotations are not readily available) held by BlackRock Cash Funds: Institutional’s Master Portfolio (including restricted securities) are valued at fair value as determined in good faith by the Board or BlackRock pursuant to the Valuation Procedures.

Certain of the securities acquired by BlackRock Cash Funds: Institutional’s Master Portfolio may be traded on foreign exchanges or OTC markets on days on which BlackRock Cash Funds: Institutional’s Master Portfolio’s NAV is not calculated. In such cases, the NAV of BlackRock Cash Funds: Institutional’s Master Portfolio’s shares may be significantly affected on days when investors can neither purchase nor redeem shares of BlackRock Cash Funds: Institutional’s Master Portfolio.

Fair Value. When market quotations are not readily available or are believed by the Investment Adviser to be unreliable, BlackRock Cash Funds: Institutional’s Master Portfolio’s investments are valued at fair value (“Fair Value Assets”). Fair Value Assets are valued by the Investment Adviser in accordance with the Valuation Procedures. Pursuant to Rule 2a-5 under the Investment Company Act, the Board of Trustees has designated the Investment Adviser as the valuation designee for the respective funds for which it serves as investment adviser. The Investment Adviser may reasonably conclude that a market quotation is not readily available or is unreliable if, among other things, a security or other asset or liability does not have a price source due to its complete lack of trading, if the Investment Adviser believes a market quotation from a broker-dealer or other source is unreliable (e.g., where it varies significantly from a recent trade, or no longer reflects the fair value of the security or other asset or liability subsequent to the most recent market quotation), or where the security or other asset or liability is only thinly traded or due to the occurrence of a significant event subsequent to the most recent market quotation. For this purpose, a “significant event” is deemed to occur if the Investment Adviser determines, in its reasonable business judgment, that an event has occurred after the close of trading for an asset or liability but prior to or at the time of pricing BlackRock Cash Funds: Institutional’s Master Portfolio’s assets or liabilities, is likely to cause a material change to the last exchange closing price or closing market price of one or more assets or liabilities held by BlackRock Cash Funds: Institutional’s Master Portfolio. On any day the NYSE is open and a foreign market or the primary exchange on which a foreign asset or liability is traded is closed, such asset will be valued using the prior day’s price, provided that the Investment Adviser is not aware of any significant event or other information that would cause such price to no longer reflect the fair value of the asset or liability, in which case such asset or liability would be treated as a Fair Value Asset.

The Investment Adviser’s Rule 2a-5 Committee is responsible for reviewing and approving methodologies by investment type and significant inputs used in the fair valuation of BlackRock Cash Funds: Institutional’s Master Portfolio’s assets or liabilities. In addition, BlackRock Cash Funds: Institutional’s Master Portfolio’s accounting agent assists the Investment Adviser by periodically endeavoring to confirm the prices it receives from all third-party pricing services, index providers and broker-dealers. The Investment Adviser regularly evaluates the values assigned to the securities and other assets and liabilities of BlackRock Cash Funds: Institutional’s Master Portfolio.

When determining the price for a Fair Value Asset, the Investment Adviser will seek to determine the price that BlackRock Cash Funds: Institutional’s Master Portfolio might reasonably expect to receive from the current sale of that asset or liability in an arm’s-length transaction on the date on which the asset or liability is being valued, and does not seek to determine the price BlackRock Cash Funds: Institutional’s Master Portfolio might reasonably expect to receive for selling an asset or liability at a later time or if it holds the asset or liability to maturity. Fair value determinations will be based upon all available factors that the Investment Adviser deems relevant at the time of the determination, and may be based on analytical values determined by the Investment Adviser using proprietary or third party valuation models.

Fair value represents a good faith approximation of the value of an asset or liability. When determining the fair value of an investment, one or more fair value methodologies may be used (depending on certain factors, including the asset type). For example, the investment may be initially priced based on the original cost of the investment or, alternatively, using proprietary or third-party models that may rely upon one or more unobservable inputs. Prices of actual, executed or historical transactions in the relevant investment (or comparable instruments) or, where appropriate, an appraisal by a third-party experienced in the valuation of similar instruments, may also be used as a basis for establishing the fair value of an investment. The fair value or one or more assets or liabilities may not, in retrospect, be the price at which those assets or liabilities could have been sold during the period in which the particular fair values were used in determining BlackRock Cash Funds: Institutional’s Master Portfolio’s NAV. As a result, BlackRock Cash Funds: Institutional’s Master Portfolio’s sale or redemption of its shares at NAV, at a time when a holding or holdings are valued at fair value, may have the effect of diluting or increasing the economic interest of existing shareholders.

BlackRock Cash Funds: Institutional’s Master Portfolio’s annual audited financial statements, which are prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (“US GAAP”), follow the requirements for valuation set forth in Financial Accounting Standards Board Accounting Standards Codification Topic 820, “Fair Value Measurements and Disclosures” (“ASC 820”), which defines and establishes a framework for measuring fair value under US GAAP and expands financial statement disclosure requirements relating to fair value measurements.

Generally, ASC 820 and other accounting rules applicable to funds and various assets in which they invest are evolving. Such changes may adversely affect BlackRock Cash Funds: Institutional’s Master Portfolio. For example, the evolution of rules governing the determination of the fair market value of assets or liabilities to the extent such rules become more stringent would tend to increase the cost and/or reduce the availability of third-party determinations of fair market value. This may in turn increase the costs associated with selling assets or affect their liquidity due to BlackRock Cash Funds: Institutional’s Master Portfolio’s inability to obtain a third-party determination of fair market value.

Terms of Purchase and Redemption. The Funds are generally open Monday through Friday and are closed on weekends and are generally closed on all other days that the Fedwire Funds Service (the “Fedwire”) is closed or the primary markets for the Master Portfolios’ portfolio securities (i.e., the bond markets) are closed. The holidays on which both the Fedwire and the primary markets for the Master Portfolios’ portfolio securities are closed currently are: New Year’s Day, Martin Luther King, Jr. Day, Presidents’ Day, Memorial Day, Juneteenth, Independence Day, Labor Day, Columbus Day, Veterans Day, Thanksgiving Day and Christmas Day. The Funds are also closed on Good Friday. On any day that the principal bond markets close early (as recommended by The Securities Industry Financial Markets Association (“SIFMA”)) or the Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia or the New York Stock Exchange (“NYSE”) closes early⁽¹⁾, a Fund may advance the time on that day by which a purchase order must be placed so that it will be effected and begin to earn dividends that day. Each Fund reserves the right to change the amount of the minimum investment and subsequent purchases in the Fund. An investor’s investment in the Funds and/or other investment vehicles managed or maintained by BFA or its affiliates may be aggregated when determining whether an investor meets a minimum investment amount. The minimum initial investment amounts for the classes of the Funds may be reduced or waived by BFA. Orders received after the applicable deadline for a Fund on any Business Day (or, if the Fund closes early, at such closing time) will be cancelled. In addition, the Funds reserve the right to advance the time by which purchase and redemption orders must be received to be executed on the same business day as permitted by the SEC and applicable law.

To invest by mail, make your check payable to the Fund of your choice and mail it to State Street Bank and Trust Company, Attn: Quincy Nunnally-Transfer Agency, P.O. Box 5493, Boston, Massachusetts 02206. Please include the Fund’s Share Class number

and your account number on your check. You will find the numbers on your monthly statements. When a direct buyer purchases Fund shares and then quickly sells (e.g., sells before clearance of the purchase check), the Fund may delay the payment of proceeds for up to ten days to ensure that purchase checks have cleared.

In-Kind Purchases. Payment for shares of the Funds may, at the discretion of BFA, be made in the form of securities that are permissible investments for the Funds and must meet the investment objectives, policies and limitations of the Funds as described in their Prospectus. In connection with an in-kind securities payment, the Funds may require, among other things, that the securities (i) be valued on the day of purchase in accordance with the pricing methods used by the Funds or the Master Portfolios; (ii) are accompanied by satisfactory assurance that the Funds will have good and marketable title to such securities received by them; (iii) are not subject to any restrictions upon resale by the Funds; (iv) be in proper form for transfer to the Funds; and (v) are accompanied by adequate information concerning the basis and other tax matters relating to the securities. All dividends, interest, subscription or other rights pertaining to such securities shall become the property of the Funds engaged in the in-kind purchase transaction and must be delivered to such Fund or Funds by the investor upon receipt from the issuer. Securities acquired through an in-kind purchase will be acquired for investment and not for immediate resale. A Fund immediately will transfer to its Master Portfolio any and all securities received by it in connection with an in-kind purchase transaction, in exchange for interests in such Master Portfolio. Shares purchased in exchange for securities generally cannot be redeemed until the transfer has settled.

Suspension of Redemption Rights or Payment of Redemption Proceeds. The Funds generally remit the proceeds from a sale the same Business Day after receiving a properly executed order to sell. Each Fund can delay payment for one Business Day. A Fund may postpone and/or suspend redemption and payment beyond one Business Day only as follows: (1) for any period during which there is a non-routine closure of the Federal Reserve wire system or applicable Federal Reserve Banks; (2) for any period (a) during which the NYSE is closed other than customary weekend and holiday closings or (b) during which trading on the NYSE is restricted; (3) for any period during which an emergency exists as a result of which (a) disposal of securities owned by a Fund is not reasonably practicable or (b) it is not reasonably practicable for a Fund to fairly determine the net asset value of shares of the Fund; (4) for any period during which the SEC has, by rule or regulation, deemed that (a) trading shall be restricted or (b) an emergency exists; (5) for any period that the SEC may by order permit for your protection; (6) for any period during which a Fund, as part of a necessary liquidation of the Fund, has properly postponed and/or suspended redemption of shares and payment in accordance with Federal securities laws as discussed below; or (7) for any period during which the Institutional Fund, at the discretion of the Board, has temporarily suspended redemptions of shares due to a decline in the Fund’s weekly liquid assets pursuant to Rule 2a-7 (as discussed in the Prospectus).

If the Board, including a majority of the non-interested trustees, determines either that (1) a Fund has invested, at the end of a business day, less than 10% of its total assets in weekly liquid assets, or (2) in the case of BlackRock Cash Funds: Treasury, such Fund’s calculated NAV per share has deviated from $1.00 or such deviation is likely to occur; then the Board, subject to certain conditions, may in the case of a Fund that the Board has determined to liquidate irrevocably, suspend redemptions and payment of redemption proceeds in order to facilitate the permanent liquidation of the Fund in an orderly manner. If this were to occur, it would likely result in a delay in your receipt of your redemption proceeds.

Declaration of Trust Provisions Regarding Redemptions at Option of Trust. As provided in the Trust’s Declaration of Trust, the Trustees may require shareholders to redeem shares for any reason under terms set by the Trustees, including, but not limited to, the failure of a shareholder to supply a taxpayer identification number if required to do so, or to have the minimum investment required, or to pay when due for the purchase of shares issued to such shareholder.

Since the Funds invest all of their assets in portfolios of MIP, set forth below is a description of the Master Portfolios’ policies governing portfolio securities transactions.

General. Subject to policies established by the Board of Trustees, BFA is primarily responsible for the execution of a Master Portfolio’s portfolio transactions and the allocation of brokerage. BFA does not execute transactions through any particular broker or dealer, but seeks to obtain the best net results for the Master Portfolio, taking into account such factors as price (including the applicable brokerage commission or dealer spread), size of order, difficulty of execution, operational facilities of the firm and the firm’s risk and skill in positioning blocks of securities. While BFA generally seeks reasonable trade execution costs, a Master Portfolio does not necessarily pay the lowest spread or commission available, and payment of the lowest commission or spread is not necessarily consistent with obtaining the best price and execution in particular transactions. The following disclosure provides some more detail regarding the Master Portfolio’s practices regarding Portfolio Transactions. Depending on its investment objective, a Master Portfolio may not engage in some of the transactions described below.

BFA does not consider the provision or value of research, products or services a broker or dealer may provide, if any, as a factor in the selection of a broker or dealer or the determination of the reasonableness of commissions paid in connection with portfolio transactions. BFA does not consider sales of shares of the mutual funds it advises as a factor in the selection of brokers or dealers to execute portfolio transactions for a Master Portfolio; however, whether or not a particular broker or dealer sells shares of the mutual funds advised by BFA neither qualifies nor disqualifies such broker or dealer to execute transactions for those mutual funds.

A Master Portfolio’s purchase and sale orders for securities may be combined with those of other accounts that BFA manages or advises, and for which it has brokerage placement authority. If purchases or sales of portfolio securities of a Master Portfolio and one or more other accounts managed or advised by BFA are considered at or about the same time, transactions in such securities are allocated among the Master Portfolio and the other accounts in a manner deemed equitable to all by BFA. In some cases, this procedure could have a detrimental effect on the price or volume of the security as far as a Master Portfolio is concerned. However, in other cases, it is possible that the ability to participate in volume transactions and to negotiate lower brokerage commissions will be beneficial to a Master Portfolio.

Payments of commissions to brokers who are affiliated persons of the Master Portfolio with respect to the Fund (or affiliated persons of such persons), will be made in accordance with Rule 17e-1 under the 1940 Act.

Each Master Portfolio anticipates that its brokerage transactions involving foreign securities generally will be conducted primarily on the principal stock exchanges of the applicable country. Foreign equity securities may be held by a Master Portfolio in the form of depositary receipts, or other securities convertible into foreign equity securities. Depositary receipts may be listed on stock exchanges, or traded in OTC markets in the United States or Europe, as the case may be. American Depositary Receipts, like other securities traded in the United States, will be subject to negotiated commission rates. Because the shares of each Fund and interests of the Master Portfolios are redeemable on a daily basis in U.S. dollars, each Master Portfolio intends to manage its portfolio so as to give reasonable assurance that it will be able to obtain U.S. dollars to the extent necessary to meet anticipated redemptions. Under present conditions, it is not believed that these considerations will have a significant effect on a Master Portfolio’s portfolio strategies.

Each Master Portfolio may invest in certain securities traded in the OTC market and intends to deal directly with the dealers who make a market in the particular securities, except in those circumstances in which better prices and execution are available elsewhere. Under the 1940 Act, persons affiliated with a Master Portfolio and persons who are affiliated with such affiliated persons are prohibited from dealing with the Master Portfolio as principal in the purchase and sale of securities unless a permissive order allowing such transactions is obtained from the SEC. Since transactions in the OTC market usually involve transactions with the dealers acting as principal for their own accounts, the Master Portfolios will not deal with affiliated persons in connection with such transactions. However, an affiliated person of a Master Portfolio may serve as its broker in OTC transactions conducted on an agency basis provided that, among other things, the fee or commission received by such affiliated broker is reasonable and fair compared to the fee or commission received by non-affiliated brokers in connection with comparable transactions.

OTC issues, including most fixed income securities such as corporate debt and U.S. Government securities, are normally traded on a “net” basis without a stated commission, through dealers acting for their own account and not as brokers. The Master Portfolios will primarily engage in transactions with these dealers or deal directly with the issuer unless a better price or execution could be obtained by using a broker. Prices paid to a dealer with respect to both foreign and domestic securities will generally include a “spread,” which is the difference between the prices at which the dealer is willing to purchase and sell the specific security at the time, and includes the dealer’s normal profit.

Purchases of money market instruments by a Master Portfolio are made from dealers, underwriters and issuers. The Master Portfolios do not currently expect to incur any brokerage commission expense on such transactions because money market instruments are generally traded on a “net” basis with dealers acting as principal for their own accounts without a stated commission. The price of the security, however, usually includes a profit to the dealer. Each Master Portfolio intends to purchase only securities with remaining maturities of 13 months or less as determined in accordance with the rules of the SEC and the policies or investment objectives of the Fund and Master Portfolio. As a result, the portfolio turnover rates of a Master Portfolio will be relatively high. However, because brokerage commissions will not normally be paid with respect to investments made by a money market fund, the turnover rates should not adversely affect the Master Portfolio’s net asset values or net income.

A Master Portfolio will not purchase securities during the existence of any underwriting or selling group relating to such securities of which BFA or any affiliated person (as defined in the 1940 Act) thereof is a member except pursuant to procedures adopted by the Board in accordance with Rule 10f-3 under the 1940 Act. In no instance will portfolio securities be purchased from or sold to BFA or any affiliated person thereof except as permitted by SEC exemptive order or by applicable law.

Portfolio Turnover. Portfolio turnover may vary from year to year, as well as within a year. Because the portfolios of the Funds consist of securities with relatively short-term maturities, the Funds expect to experience high portfolio turnover. A high portfolio turnover rate should not adversely affect the Funds since portfolio transactions ordinarily will be made directly with principals on a net basis and, consequently, the Funds usually will not incur brokerage expenses or excessive transaction costs.

Securities of Regular Broker-Dealers. Neither of the Master Portfolios owned securities of their “regular brokers or dealers” (as defined in the 1940 Act) or their parents as of December 31, 2022, if any portion of such holdings were purchased during the fiscal year ended December 31, 2022, except as disclosed below:

The following information supplements, and should be read in conjunction with, the section in each Prospectus entitled “Account Information — Taxes.” The Prospectus generally describes the U.S. federal

income tax treatment of distributions by the Funds. This section of the SAI provides additional information concerning U.S. federal income taxes. It is based on the U.S. Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “Internal Revenue Code”), applicable Treasury Regulations, judicial authority, and administrative rulings and practice, all as of the date of this SAI and all of which are subject to change, including changes with retroactive effect. The following discussion does not address any state, local or foreign tax matters.

A shareholder’s tax treatment may vary depending upon his or her particular situation. This discussion only applies to shareholders who are U.S. persons, i.e., U.S. citizens or residents or U.S. corporations, trusts or estates, and who are subject to U.S. federal income tax and hold Fund shares as capital assets within the meaning of the Internal Revenue Code. Except as otherwise noted, it may not apply to certain types of shareholders who may be subject to special rules, such as partnerships (or other entities treated as partnerships for U.S. federal income tax purposes), insurance companies, tax-exempt organizations, shareholders holding Fund shares through tax-advantaged accounts (such as 401(k) plan accounts or individual retirement accounts (“IRAs”)), financial institutions, broker-dealers, entities that are not organized under the laws of the United States or a political subdivision thereof, persons who are neither citizens nor residents of the United States, shareholders holding Fund shares as part of a hedge, straddle or conversion transaction, and shareholders who are subject to the U.S. federal alternative minimum tax.

The Trust has not requested and will not request an advance ruling from the Internal Revenue Service (the “IRS”) as to the U.S. federal income tax matters described below. The IRS could adopt positions contrary to those discussed below and such positions could be sustained. In addition, the foregoing discussion and the discussions in the Prospectus applicable to each shareholder address only some of the U.S. federal income tax considerations generally affecting investments in the Funds. Prospective shareholders are urged to consult with their own tax advisers and financial planners as to the particular U.S. federal tax consequences to them of an investment in the Funds, as well as the applicability and effect of any state, local or foreign laws, and the effect of possible changes in applicable tax laws.

Qualification as a Regulated Investment Company. Each Fund has elected to be treated, has qualified and intends to continue to qualify each year, as a “regulated investment company” under Subchapter M of the Internal Revenue Code as long as such qualification is in the best interests of the Fund’s shareholders. Each Fund will be treated as a separate entity for U.S. federal income tax purposes. Thus, the provisions of the Internal Revenue Code applicable to regulated investment companies generally will apply separately to each Fund, even though each Fund is a series of a trust. Furthermore, each Fund separately determines its income, gains, losses and expenses for U.S. federal income tax purposes.

In order to qualify as a regulated investment company under the Internal Revenue Code, each Fund must, among other things, derive at least 90% of its annual gross income from dividends, interest, certain payments with respect to securities loans, gains from the sale or other disposition of stock, securities or foreign currencies, or other income attributable to its business of investing in such stock, securities or foreign currencies (including, but not limited to, gains from options, futures or forward contracts) and net income derived from an interest in a qualified publicly-traded partnership as defined in Section 851(h) of the Internal Revenue Code. Pursuant to regulations that may be promulgated in the future, the IRS may limit qualifying income from foreign currency gains to the amount of such currency gains that are directly related to a regulated investment company’s principal business of investing in stock or securities. Each Fund must also diversify its holdings so that, at the end of each quarter of each taxable year: (i) at least 50% of the value of its assets consists of (A) cash and cash items (including receivables), U.S. Government securities and securities of other regulated investment companies, and (B) other securities, with such other securities limited, in respect to any one issuer, to an amount not greater than 5% of the value of the Fund’s total assets and to not more than 10% of the outstanding voting securities of such issuer and (ii) not more than 25% of the value of the Fund’s total assets is invested in (A) the securities (other than U.S. Government securities and securities of other regulated investment companies) of any one issuer, (B) the securities (other than the securities of other regulated investment companies) of two or more issuers that the Fund controls and that are engaged in the same, similar, or related trades or businesses, or (C) the securities of one or more qualified publicly-traded partnerships. The qualifying

income and diversification requirements applicable to a Fund may limit the extent to which it can engage in transactions in options, futures contracts, forward contracts and swap agreements.

In addition, each Fund generally must distribute to its shareholders an amount equal to or exceeding the sum of (i) 90% of its “investment company taxable income,” as that term is defined in the Internal Revenue Code (which generally includes, among other things, dividends, taxable interest, and the excess of any net short-term capital gains over net long-term capital losses, as reduced by certain deductible expenses) without regard to the deduction for dividends paid and (ii) 90% of its net tax-exempt income earned in each taxable year. A Fund generally will not be subject to U.S. federal income tax on the investment company taxable income and “net capital gain” (i.e., the excess of net long-term capital gain over net short-term capital loss) it distributes to its shareholders. However, if a Fund meets such distribution requirements, but chooses to retain some portion of its investment company taxable income or net capital gain, it generally will be subject to U.S. federal income tax at regular corporate rates on the amount retained. Although dividends generally will be treated as distributed when paid, if a Fund declares a distribution to shareholders of record in October, November or December of one year and pays the distribution by January 31 of the following year, the Fund and its shareholders will be treated as if the Fund paid the distribution by December 31 of the calendar year in which it was declared. Each Fund intends to distribute its net income and gain in a timely manner to maintain its status as a regulated investment company and eliminate fund-level U.S. federal income taxation of such income and gain. However, no assurance can be given that a Fund will not be subject to U.S. federal income taxation.

If, in any taxable year, a Fund fails to qualify as a regulated investment company under the Internal Revenue Code, notwithstanding the availability of certain relief provisions, or fails to meet the distribution requirements described above, the Fund would be taxed in the same manner as an ordinary U.S. corporation without any deduction for distributions to shareholders, and all distributions from the Fund’s earnings and profits (including any distributions of net tax-exempt income and net capital gain) to its shareholders would also be taxable as ordinary income at the shareholder level. To qualify again to be taxed as a regulated investment company in a subsequent year, the Fund may be required to pay an interest charge and penalty to the IRS as well as distribute to its shareholders its earnings and profits attributable to non-regulated investment company years. In addition, if the Fund fails to qualify as a regulated investment company for a period greater than two taxable years, the Fund may be required to recognize and pay tax on any net built-in gain (the excess of aggregate gain, including items of income, over aggregate loss that would have been realized if the Fund had been liquidated) or, alternatively, to be subject to taxation on such built-in gain recognized for a period of ten years, in order to qualify as a regulated investment company in a subsequent year.

Excise Tax. A 4% non-deductible excise tax will be imposed on each Fund to the extent it fails to distribute during each calendar year (i) at least 98% of its ordinary income (excluding capital gains and losses) for the calendar year, (ii) at least 98.2% of its net capital gain income (generally the excess of net long-term capital gains over net short-term capital losses as adjusted for ordinary losses) for the 12 month period ending on October 31, and (iii) all of its ordinary income and net capital gain income from previous years that was not distributed or subject to tax during such years. Each Fund intends to distribute substantially all of its net income and gains, if any, by the end of each calendar year and, thus, expects not to be subject to the excise tax. However, no assurance can be given that a Fund will not be subject to the excise tax.

Capital Loss Carry-Forwards. A Fund is permitted to carry forward indefinitely a net capital loss to offset its capital gains, if any, and such loss retains its character as either short-term or long-term capital loss. For taxable years of a Fund beginning before December 23, 2010, the Fund is permitted to carry forward a net capital loss from any year to offset its capital gains, if any, realized during the eight years following the year of the loss, and such loss is treated as a short-term capital loss in the year to which it is carried. Net capital losses incurred in taxable years of a Fund beginning before December 23, 2010 may not be used to offset capital gains until all net capital losses incurred in taxable years of the Fund beginning after December 22, 2010 have been utilized. As a result, some net capital losses incurred in taxable years of a Fund beginning before December 23, 2010 may expire unutilized. If future capital gains are offset by carried-forward capital losses, such future capital gains are not subject to Fund-level U.S. federal income taxation, regardless of

whether they are distributed to shareholders. Accordingly, the Funds do not expect to distribute any such capital gains. The Funds cannot carry back or carry forward any net operating losses. As a money market fund, each Fund does not expect to have material capital loss carry-forwards, but no assurance can be given to this effect.

Investment through the Master Portfolios. The Funds seek to continue to qualify as regulated investment companies by investing their assets through the Master Portfolios. Each Master Portfolio is treated as a non-publicly traded partnership (or, in the event that a Fund is the sole investor in a Master Portfolio, as disregarded from the Fund) for U.S. federal income tax purposes rather than as a regulated investment company or a corporation under the Internal Revenue Code. Under the rules applicable to a non-publicly traded partnership (or disregarded entity), a proportionate share of any interest, dividends, gains and losses of a Master Portfolio will be deemed to have been realized by (i.e., “passed-through” to) its investors, including the corresponding Fund, regardless of whether any amounts are actually distributed by the Master Portfolio. Each investor in a Master Portfolio will be taxable on such share, as determined in accordance with the governing instruments of the particular Master Portfolio, the Internal Revenue Code and Treasury Regulations. Therefore, to the extent that a Master Portfolio were to accrue but not distribute any income or gains, the corresponding Fund would be deemed to have realized its proportionate share of such income or gains without receipt of any corresponding distribution. However, each of the Master Portfolios will seek to minimize recognition by its investors (such as the Funds) of income and gains without a corresponding distribution. Furthermore, each Master Portfolio’s assets, income and distributions will be managed in such a way that an investor in a Master Portfolio will be able to continue to qualify as a regulated investment company by investing its assets through the Master Portfolio.

Taxation of Fund Investments. In general, if a Fund realizes gains or losses on the sale of portfolio securities, such gains or losses are capital gains or losses. If the Fund has held the disposed securities for more than one year at the time of disposition, such gains and losses generally are treated as long-term capital gains or losses.

If a Fund purchases a debt obligation with original issue discount (“OID”), generally at a price less than its principal amount, such as a zero-coupon bond, the Fund may be required to annually include in its taxable income a portion of the OID as ordinary income, even though the Fund will not receive cash payments for such discount until maturity or disposition of the obligation. A portion of the OID includible in income with respect to certain high-yield corporate debt securities may be treated as a dividend for U.S. federal income tax purposes. Gains recognized on the disposition of a debt obligation (including a municipal obligation) purchased by a Fund at a market discount, usually at a price less than its principal amount, generally will be treated as ordinary income to the extent of the portion of market discount which accrued, but was not previously recognized pursuant to an available election, during the term that the Fund held the debt obligation. A Fund generally will be required to make distributions to shareholders representing the OID on debt securities that is currently includible in income, even though the cash representing such income may not have been received by the Fund. Cash to pay such distributions may be obtained from borrowing or from sales of securities held by a Fund which the Fund otherwise might have continued to hold.

If an option granted by a Fund lapses or is terminated through a closing transaction, such as a repurchase by the Fund of the option from its holder, the Fund generally will realize a short-term capital gain or loss, depending on whether the premium income is greater or less than the amount paid by the Fund in the closing transaction. If securities are sold by a Fund pursuant to the exercise of a call option granted by it, the Fund will add the premium received to the sale price of the securities delivered in determining the amount of gain or loss on the sale. If securities are purchased by a Fund pursuant to the exercise of a put option written by it, the Fund will subtract the premium received from its cost basis in the securities purchased.

Foreign exchange gains and losses realized by a Fund in connection with certain transactions involving foreign currency-denominated debt securities, certain options and futures contracts relating to foreign currency, foreign currency forward contracts, foreign currencies, or payables or receivables denominated in a foreign currency are subject to Section 988 of the Internal Revenue Code, which generally causes such gains and losses to be treated as ordinary income and losses and may affect the amount and timing of recognition of the

Fund’s income. Under Treasury Regulations that may be promulgated in the future, any such transactions that are not directly related to a Fund’s principal business of investing in stock or securities (or its options contracts or futures contracts with respect to stock or securities) may have to be limited in order to enable the Fund to satisfy the 90% income test described above. If the net foreign exchange loss for a year exceeds a Fund’s investment company taxable income (computed without regard to such loss), the resulting ordinary loss for such year will not be deductible by the Fund or its shareholders in future years.

If a Fund enters into a “constructive sale” of any appreciated financial position in stock, a partnership interest, or certain debt instruments, the Fund will be treated as if it had sold and immediately repurchased the property and must recognize gain (but not loss) with respect to that position. A constructive sale occurs when a Fund enters into one of the following transactions with respect to the same or substantially identical property: (i) a short sale; (ii) an offsetting notional principal contract; (iii) a futures or forward contract; or (iv) other transactions identified in Treasury Regulations that may be promulgated in the future. The character of the gain from constructive sales will depend upon a Fund’s holding period in the property. Losses from a constructive sale of property will be recognized when the property is subsequently disposed of. The character of such losses will depend upon a Fund’s holding period in the property and the application of various loss deferral provisions in the Internal Revenue Code. Constructive sale treatment does not apply to a transaction if such transaction is closed before the end of the 30th day after the close of the Fund’s taxable year, the Fund holds the appreciated financial position throughout the 60-day period beginning with the day such transaction was closed, and the Fund’s risk of loss with respect to such position is not reduced at any time during such 60-day period.

In addition to the investments described above, prospective shareholders should be aware that other investments made by the Funds may involve sophisticated tax rules that may result in income or gain recognition by the Funds without corresponding current cash receipts. Although the Funds seek to avoid significant non-cash income, such non-cash income could be recognized by the Funds, in which case the Funds may distribute cash derived from other sources in order to meet the minimum distribution requirements described above. In this regard, the Funds could be required at times to liquidate investments prematurely in order to satisfy their minimum distribution requirements.

Taxation of Distributions. For U.S. federal income tax purposes, a Fund’s earnings and profits, described above, are determined at the end of the Fund’s taxable year and are allocated pro rata to distributions made throughout the entire year in the case of a Fund with a calendar taxable year. In the case of a Fund with a non-calendar taxable year, a Fund’s earnings and profits are allocated first to distributions made on or before December 31 of the taxable year, and then to distributions made after December 31 of the taxable year. All distributions paid out of a Fund’s earnings and profits (as determined at the end of the year), whether paid in cash or reinvested in the Fund, generally are deemed to be taxable distributions and must generally be reported on each Fund shareholder’s U.S. federal income tax return. Distributions in excess of a Fund’s earnings and profits will first be treated as a return of capital up to the amount of a shareholder’s tax basis in the shareholder’s Fund shares and any such amount in excess of that basis as capital gain from the sale of shares, as discussed below. A Fund may make distributions in excess of earnings and profits to a limited extent, from time to time.

In general, assuming that each Fund has sufficient earnings and profits, distributions from investment company taxable income are taxable as ordinary income. Since each Fund’s income is derived from sources that do not pay “qualified dividend income,” as defined in Section 1(h)(11)(B) of the Internal Revenue Code, distributions from investment company taxable income of the Funds generally will not qualify for taxation at the maximum 20% U.S. federal income tax rate available to individuals on qualified dividend income.

Distributions reported by a Fund as a “capital gain dividend”, if any, will be taxed to shareholders as long-term capital gain (to the extent such distributions do not exceed the Fund’s actual net capital gain for the taxable year), regardless of how long a shareholder has held Fund shares. Each Fund will report capital gains dividends, if any, in a written statement furnished to its shareholders. Normally the Funds do not expect to realize or distribute a significant amount of long-term capital gains (if any).

Distributions from each Fund paid to corporate shareholders are not expected to qualify for the dividends-received deductions generally available to corporate taxpayers. The U.S. federal income tax status of all distributions will be reported to shareholders annually.

Some states will not tax distributions made to individual shareholders that are attributable to interest a Fund earned on direct obligations of the U.S. Government if the Fund meets the state’s minimum investment or reporting requirements, if any. Investments in Ginnie Mae or Fannie Mae securities, bankers’ acceptances, commercial paper and repurchase agreements collateralized by U.S. Government securities generally do not qualify for tax-free treatment. This exemption may not apply to corporate shareholders.

Sales of Fund Shares. Redemptions are treated as sales for tax purposes and generally are taxable events for shareholders that are subject to tax. In general, if Fund shares are sold, a shareholder will recognize gain or loss equal to the difference between the amount realized on the sale and the shareholder’s adjusted tax basis in the shares. As long as BlackRock Cash Funds: Treasury maintains a constant NAV of $1.00 per share, generally no gain or loss should be recognized upon the sale of shares of BlackRock Cash Funds: Treasury. If a shareholder recognizes gain or loss on the sale of Fund shares, this gain or loss will be long-term capital gain or loss if the shareholder has held such Fund shares for more than one year at the time of the sale. If a shareholder receives a capital gain dividend with respect to any Fund share and such Fund share is held for six months or less, then (unless otherwise disallowed) any loss on the sale or exchange of that Fund share will be treated as a long-term capital loss to the extent of the capital gain dividend. Except as described below in the case of certain redemptions of money market funds with floating rate NAVs, losses on redemptions or other dispositions of shares may be disallowed under “wash sale” rules in the event of other investments in the same Fund (including those made pursuant to reinvestment of dividends and/or capital gain distributions) within a period of 61 days beginning 30 days before and ending 30 days after a redemption or other disposition of shares. In such a case, the disallowed portion of any loss generally would be included in the U.S. federal tax basis of the shares acquired in the other investments.

Because BlackRock Cash Funds: Institutional offers and redeems its shares using a floating NAV, a redeeming shareholder may realize gains and losses because of differences between the NAV at which shares are acquired and the NAV at which shares are redeemed. Ordinarily, any gains and losses realized would have to be accounted for separately. In addition, because of the so-called “wash sale” rules, any loss realized by a shareholder on a redemption of Fund shares would ordinarily be disallowed to the extent such shareholder acquired new shares of the same Fund within 30 days before or after such a redemption.

The Treasury Department and IRS have determined not to apply the wash sale rules to the redemption of investment company shares if the investment company is regulated as, and holds itself out as, a money market fund under Rule 2a-7 of the 1940 Act and has a floating rate NAV at the time of redemption. In addition, a shareholder in a money market fund (whether the money market fund has a constant NAV of $1.00 or a floating NAV) may elect to adopt a simplified, aggregate accounting method under which gains and losses can be netted based on computation periods rather than reported separately. Shareholders are urged to consult their tax advisors before deciding to adopt such accounting method.

If the Board imposes a liquidity fee on share redemptions of BlackRock Cash Funds: Institutional because of a drop in such Fund’s weekly liquid assets below certain levels, the amount that would ordinarily be payable to a redeeming shareholder of such Fund will be reduced, consequently reducing the amount of gain, or increasing the amount of loss, that would otherwise be reportable for income tax purposes. The liquidity fee cannot be separately claimed as a deduction.

Any such liquidity fee will constitute an asset of the imposing Fund and will serve to benefit non-redeeming shareholders. However, the Funds do not intend to distribute such fees to non-redeeming shareholders. Such fees may, however, raise the Institutional Fund’s NAV, increasing the taxable income or reducing the deductible losses of shareholders that redeem their shares at a later time when such fees are not being charged. If a Fund receives liquidity fees, it will consider the appropriate tax treatment of such fees to the Fund at such time.

Foreign Taxes. Amounts realized by a Fund on foreign securities may be subject to withholding and other taxes imposed by foreign countries. Tax conventions between certain countries and the United States may

reduce or eliminate such taxes. If more than 50% of the value of a Fund’s total assets at the close of its taxable year were to consist of securities of non-U.S. corporations, the Fund would be eligible to file an annual election with the IRS pursuant to which the Fund could pass-through to its shareholders on a pro rata basis foreign income and similar taxes paid by the Fund, which could be claimed, subject to certain limitations, either as a tax credit or deduction by shareholders. However, neither of the Funds expects to qualify for this election.

Federal Income Tax Rates. As of the date of this SAI, the maximum stated individual U.S. federal income tax rate applicable to (i) ordinary income generally is 37%; (ii) capital gain dividends is 20%; and (iii) long-term capital gains generally is 20%. In addition, a 3.8% Medicare tax is imposed on the net investment income (which includes, but is not limited to, interest, dividends and net gain from investments) of U.S. individuals with income exceeding $200,000, or $250,000 if married filing jointly, and of trusts and estates. An individual shareholder also should be aware that the benefits of the favorable tax rates applicable to capital gain dividends and long-term capital gains may be impacted by the application of the alternative minimum tax.

The current corporate U.S. federal income tax rate applicable to ordinary income, capital gain dividends, and long-term capital gains is 21%. Actual marginal tax rates may be higher for some shareholders, for example, through reductions in deductions. Naturally, the amount of tax payable by any taxpayer will be affected by a combination of tax laws covering, for example, deductions, credits, deferrals, exemptions, sources of income and other matters.

Backup Withholding. The Trust may be required to withhold, subject to certain exemptions, at a rate of 24% (“backup withholding”) on all distributions and redemption proceeds (including proceeds from exchanges and redemptions in-kind) paid or credited to a Fund shareholder, unless the shareholder generally certifies under penalties of perjury that the shareholder’s social security or other “taxpayer identification number” (“TIN”) provided is correct and that the shareholder is not subject to backup withholding, or the IRS notifies the Fund that the shareholder’s TIN is incorrect or that the shareholder is subject to back-up withholding. This tax is not an additional U.S. federal income tax imposed on the shareholder, and the shareholder may claim the tax withheld as a tax payment on his or her federal income tax return, provided that the required information is furnished to the IRS. An investor must provide a valid TIN upon opening or reopening an account. If a shareholder fails to furnish a valid TIN upon request, the shareholder can also be subject to IRS penalties.

Tax-Deferred Plans. Shares of the Funds may be available for a variety of tax-deferred retirement and other tax-advantaged plans and accounts, including IRAs, Simplified Employee Pension Plans, Savings Incentive Match Plans for Employees, Roth IRAs, and Coverdell Education Savings Accounts. Prospective investors should contact their tax advisers and financial planners regarding the tax consequences to them of holding Fund shares through a tax-advantaged plan or account.

Foreign Shareholders. If you are a non-resident alien individual, foreign trust (i.e., a trust other than a trust which a U.S. court is able to exercise primary supervision over administration of that trust and one or more U.S. persons have authority to control substantial decisions of that trust), foreign estate (i.e., the income of which is not subject to U.S. tax regardless of source) or a foreign corporation (each, a “foreign shareholder”), the Fund’s ordinary income dividends (which include distributions of net short-term capital gains) are generally subject to a 30% U.S. federal income withholding tax, unless a lower treaty rate applies. Certain distributions reported by a Fund as interest-related dividends or short-term capital gains dividends, and paid to a foreign shareholder may be exempt from U.S. federal income withholding tax, provided that the Fund received proper certification of foreign status from the foreign shareholder, and other conditions are met. However, a Fund may choose not to report distributions in this manner. Notwithstanding the foregoing, if such distribution is “effectively connected” with a U.S. trade or business (or, if an income tax treaty applies, is attributable to a permanent establishment) of the recipient foreign shareholder, then the withholding tax and any related exemptions applicable to foreign persons generally will not apply, and the tax, reporting and withholding requirements applicable to U.S. persons will apply.

Subject to the discussion on foreign account tax compliance below, a foreign shareholder’s capital gains realized on a disposition of Fund shares, if any, and capital gain distributions by a Fund, if any, will generally not be subject to U.S. federal income tax withholding, provided that the Fund obtains a properly completed and signed certificate of foreign status, unless: (i) such gains or distributions are “effectively connected” with a U.S. trade or business (or, if an income tax treaty applies, are attributable to a permanent establishment) of the foreign shareholder; or (ii) in the case of an individual foreign shareholder, the shareholder is present in the U.S. for a period or periods aggregating 183 days or more during the year of the sale and certain other conditions are met. If such capital gains or distributions are “effectively connected” with a U.S. trade or business or are attributable to a U.S. permanent establishment of the foreign shareholder pursuant to an income tax treaty, then the tax, reporting and withholding requirements applicable to U.S. persons apply. If such capital gains or distributions are not “effectively connected” for this purpose, but the foreign shareholder meets the requirements of clause (ii) described above, such gains and distributions will be subject to U.S. federal income withholding tax at a 30% rate (or a lower rate if so provided by an applicable income tax treaty).

If a foreign shareholder is a resident of a foreign country but is not a citizen or resident of the United States at the time of the shareholder’s death, Fund shares will be deemed to be property situated in the United States and will be subject to U.S. federal estate taxes (at current graduated rates of up to 40% of the total value, less allowable deductions and credits). The availability of reduced U.S. estate taxes pursuant to an applicable estate tax convention generally depends upon compliance with the established procedures for claiming the benefits thereof, and may, under certain circumstances, depend upon the foreign shareholder making a satisfactory demonstration to U.S. tax authorities that the shareholder qualifies as a foreign person under U.S. federal income tax laws and the applicable convention. In general, no U.S. federal gift tax will be imposed on gifts of Fund shares made by foreign shareholders.

Foreign shareholders should consult with their tax advisers regarding the tax consequences of an investment in a Fund.

Special rules apply to foreign partnerships and those holding Fund shares through foreign partnerships.

Foreign Account Tax Compliance. A 30% withholding tax is currently imposed on U.S.-source dividends, interest and other income items paid to (i) certain foreign financial institutions and investment funds, and (ii) certain other foreign entities. To avoid withholding, foreign financial institutions and investment funds will generally either need to (a) collect and report to the IRS detailed information identifying their U.S. accounts and U.S. account holders, comply with due diligence procedures for identifying U.S. accounts and withhold tax on certain payments made to noncomplying foreign entities and account holders or (b) if an intergovernmental agreement is entered into and implementing legislation is adopted, comply with the agreement and legislation. Other foreign entities will generally either need to provide detailed information identifying each substantial U.S. owner or certify there are no such owners.

As of the date of this SAI, the beneficial interests in the Trust are divided into transferable shares of 37 separate and distinct series authorized and established by the Board of Trustees. The number of shares of each series, and class thereof, is unlimited and each share has no par value. The Board of Trustees may, in the future, authorize the issuance of other series representing shares of additional investment portfolios or funds. Except to the extent the 1940 Act expressly grants to shareholders the power to vote on such termination(s), the Trust, or any series (or class) thereof, may be terminated at any time by the Trustees with written notice to the shareholders.

Although the Trust is not required to hold regular annual shareholder meetings, occasional annual or special meetings may be required for purposes such as electing and removing Trustees, approving advisory contracts, and changing a Fund’s fundamental investment policies.

Voting. All shares of the Trust have equal voting rights and will be voted separately by individual series, except: (i) when required by the 1940 Act, shares will be voted in the aggregate and not by individual series; and (ii) when the Trustees have determined that the matter affects the interests of more than one series, then

the shareholders of all such affected series will be entitled to vote thereon in the aggregate and not by individual series. The Trustees also may determine that a matter affects only the interests of one or more classes of a series, in which case any such matter will be voted on separately by such class or classes. For example, a change in a Fund’s fundamental investment policy would be voted upon only by shareholders of that Fund. Additionally, approval of a Master Portfolio’s Advisory Contract is a matter to be determined separately by each Master Portfolio. Approval by the shareholders of a Fund is effective as to that Fund whether or not sufficient votes are received from the shareholders of the other investment portfolios to approve the proposal as to those investment portfolios. As used in the Prospectus of each Fund and in this SAI, the term “1940 Act majority,” when referring to approvals to be obtained from shareholders of a Fund, means the vote of the lesser of (i) 67% of the shares of the Fund represented at a meeting if the holders of more than 50% of the outstanding shares of the Fund are present in person or by proxy, or (ii) more than 50% of the outstanding shares of the Fund. The term “majority,” when referring to the approvals to be obtained from shareholders of the Trust as a whole, means the vote of the lesser of (i) 67% of the Trust’s shares represented at a meeting if the holders of more than 50% of the Trust’s outstanding shares are present in person or by proxy, or (ii) more than 50% of the Trust’s outstanding shares.

Each share will entitle the holder thereof to one vote for each dollar (and each fractional dollar thereof) of NAV (number of shares owned times NAV per share) of shares outstanding in such holder’s name on the books of the Trust. There shall be no cumulative voting in the election of Trustees. For additional voting information and a discussion of the possible effects of changes to a Master Portfolio’s investment objective or policies on a Fund, as an interestholder in the Master Portfolio, or the Fund’s shareholders, see “Description of the Funds and their Investments and Risks — Master/Feeder Structure” herein.

The Trust may dispense with an annual meeting of shareholders in any year in which it is not required to elect Trustees under the 1940 Act. However, the Trust will hold a special meeting of its shareholders for the purpose of voting on the question of removal of a Trustee or Trustees if requested in writing by the holders of at least 10% of the Trust’s outstanding voting securities, and to assist in communicating with other shareholders as required by Section 16(c) of the 1940 Act.

Dividends and Distributions. Each share of a Fund represents an equal proportional interest in the Fund with each other share and is entitled to such dividends and distributions out of the income earned on the assets belonging to the Fund as are declared in the discretion of the Trustees. In the event of the liquidation or dissolution of the Trust, shareholders of a Fund are entitled to receive the assets attributable to the Fund that are available for distribution, and a distribution of any general assets not attributable to a particular investment portfolio that are available for distribution in such manner and on such basis as the Trustees in their sole discretion may determine. Shareholders are not entitled to any preemptive rights. All shares, when issued, will be fully paid and non-assessable by the Trust.

Master Portfolios. MIP is an open-end, series management investment company organized as a Delaware statutory trust on October 20, 1993. MIP’s Declaration of Trust provides that obligations of MIP are not binding upon its Trustees individually but only upon the property of MIP and that the Trustees will not be liable for any action or failure to act, but nothing in the Declaration of Trust protects a Trustee against any liability to which the Trustee would otherwise be subject by reason of willful misfeasance, bad faith, gross negligence, or reckless disregard of the duties involved in the conduct of the Trustee’s office.

Interests in each Master Portfolio have voting and other rights generally corresponding to those rights enumerated above for shares of the Funds. MIP also intends to dispense with annual meetings, but is required by Section 16(c) of the 1940 Act to hold a special meeting and assist investor communications under the circumstances described above with respect to the Trust. Whenever a Fund is requested to vote on a matter with respect to its Master Portfolio, the Fund will follow its voting procedures, as described in “Voting” above.

The Trust provides annual and semi-annual reports to all shareholders. The annual reports contain audited financial statements and other information about the Funds, including additional information on

performance. Shareholders may obtain a copy of the Trust’s most recent annual or semi-annual reports without charge by calling 1-888-204-3956 (toll-free).

The registration statement, including the Prospectus, this SAI and the exhibits filed therewith, may be examined at the office of the SEC in Washington, D.C. Statements contained in the Prospectus or this SAI as to the contents of any contract or other document referred to herein or in the Prospectus are not necessarily complete and, in each instance, reference is made to the copy of such contract or other document filed as an exhibit to the registration statement, each such statement being qualified in all respects by such reference.

No person has been authorized to give any information or to make any representations other than those contained in the Prospectus, this SAI and in the Trust’s official sales literature in connection with the offer of the Trust’s shares and, if given or made, such other information or representations must not be relied upon as having been authorized by the Trust. This SAI does not constitute an offer in any state in which, or to any person to whom, such offering may not lawfully be made.

The audited financial statements, financial highlights and notes thereto in each Fund’s and related Master Portfolio’s Annual Report to Shareholders for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2022 (the “2022 Annual Report”) are incorporated in this SAI by reference. No other parts of the 2022 Annual Report are incorporated by reference herein. The financial statements and financial highlights included in the 2022 Annual Report have been audited by PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP. The report of PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP is incorporated herein by reference. Such financial statements and financial highlights have been incorporated herein in reliance upon the report of such firm given their authority as experts in accounting and auditing. Additional copies of the 2022 Annual Report may be obtained at no charge by telephoning State Street Bank and Trust Company at the telephone number appearing on the front page of this SAI.

The Boards of Trustees/Directors (“Directors”) of open-end funds (the “Funds”) advised by BlackRock Fund Advisors or BlackRock Advisors, LLC (“BlackRock”), have the responsibility for the oversight of 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 the responsibility to vote proxies to BlackRock, subject to the principles outlined in this Policy, as part of BlackRock’s authority to manage, acquire and dispose of account assets, all as contemplated by the Funds’ respective investment management agreements.

BlackRock has adopted guidelines and procedures (together and as from time to time amended, the “BlackRock Proxy Voting Guidelines”) governing proxy voting by accounts managed by BlackRock.

BlackRock will cast votes on behalf of each of the Funds on specific proxy issues in respect of securities held by each such Fund (or may refrain from voting) in accordance with the BlackRock Proxy Voting Guidelines.

BlackRock will report on an annual basis to the Directors on (1) a summary of all proxy votes that BlackRock has made on behalf of the Funds in the preceding year together with a representation that all votes were in accordance with the BlackRock Proxy Voting Guidelines, and (2) any changes to the BlackRock Proxy Voting Guidelines that have not previously been reported.

The purpose of this document is to provide an overarching explanation of BlackRock’s approach globally to our responsibilities as a shareholder on behalf of our clients, our expectations of companies, and our commitments to clients in terms of our own governance and transparency.

BlackRock’s purpose is to help more and more people experience financial well-being. We manage assets on behalf of institutional and individual clients, across a full spectrum of investment strategies, asset classes, and regions. Our client base includes pension plans, endowments, foundations, charities, official institutions, insurers, and other financial institutions, as well as individuals around the world. As part of our fiduciary duty to our clients, we consider it one of our responsibilities to promote sound corporate governance, as an informed, engaged shareholder on their behalf. At BlackRock, this is the responsibility of the Investment Stewardship team.

Companies are responsible for ensuring they have appropriate governance structures to serve the interests of shareholders and other key stakeholders. We believe that there are certain fundamental rights attached to shareholding. Companies and their boards should be accountable to shareholders and structured with appropriate checks and balances to ensure that they operate in shareholders’ best interests to create sustainable value. Shareholders should have the right to vote to elect, remove, and nominate directors, approve the appointment of the auditor, and amend the corporate charter or by-laws. Shareholders should be able to vote on key board decisions that are material to the protection of their investment, including but not limited to, changes to the purpose of the business, dilution levels and pre-emptive rights, and the distribution of income and capital structure. In order to make informed decisions, shareholders need sufficient and timely information. In addition, shareholder voting rights should be proportionate to their economic ownership — the principle of “one share, one vote” helps achieve this balance.

Consistent with these shareholder rights, BlackRock has a responsibility to monitor and provide feedback to companies in our role as stewards of our clients’ investments. Investment stewardship is how we use our voice as an investor to promote sound corporate governance and business practices to help maximize long-term shareholder value for our clients, the vast majority of whom are investing for long-term goals such as retirement. BlackRock Investment Stewardship (BIS) does this through engagement with management teams and/or board members on material business issues and, for those clients who have given us authority, through voting proxies in their best long-term financial interests.¹ We also contribute to consultations on public policy and private sector initiatives on industry standards, consistent with our clients’ interests as long-term shareholders.

BlackRock looks to companies to provide timely, accurate, and comprehensive disclosure on all material governance and business matters. This transparency allows shareholders to appropriately understand and assess how relevant risks and opportunities are being effectively identified and managed. Where company reporting and disclosure is inadequate or where the governance approach taken may be inconsistent with durable, long-term value creation for shareholders, we will engage with a company and/or vote in a manner that advances long-term shareholders’ interests.

BlackRock views engagement as an important activity; engagement provides us with the opportunity to improve our understanding of the business and of the risks and opportunities that are material to the companies in which our clients invest. Engagement may also inform our voting decisions. As long-term investors on behalf of clients, we seek to have regular and continuing dialogue with executives and board directors to advance sound governance and durable business practices aligned with long-term value creation,

as well as to understand the effectiveness of the company’s management and oversight of material issues. Engagement is an important mechanism for providing feedback on company practices and disclosures, particularly where we believe they could be enhanced to support a company’s ability to deliver financial performance. Similarly, it provides us with an opportunity to hear directly from company boards and management on how they believe their actions are aligned with durable, long-term value creation.

We generally vote in support of management and boards that exhibit an approach to decision-making that is consistent with creating durable, long-term value for shareholders. If we have concerns about a company’s approach, we may choose to explain our expectations to the company’s board and management. Following that engagement, we may signal through our voting that we have outstanding concerns, generally by voting against the re-election of directors we view as having responsibility for an issue. We apply our regional proxy voting guidelines to achieve the outcome that is most aligned with our clients’ long-term financial interests.

We recognize that accepted standards and norms of corporate governance can differ between markets. However, in our experience, there are certain fundamental elements of governance practice that are intrinsic globally to a company’s ability to create long-term value for shareholders. These global themes are set out in this overarching set of principles (the Principles), which are anchored in transparency and accountability. At a minimum, it is our view that companies should observe the accepted corporate governance standards in their domestic market and ask that, if they do not, they explain how their approach better supports durable, long-term value creation.

Our regional and market-specific voting guidelines explain how these Principles inform our voting decisions in relation to specific ballot items for shareholder meetings.

Our primary focus is on the performance of the board of directors to promote sound corporate governance. The performance of the board is critical to the economic success of the company and the protection of shareholders’ interests. As part of their responsibilities, board members owe fiduciary duties to shareholders in overseeing the strategic direction and operation of the company. For this reason, BIS sees engaging with and the election of directors as one of our most important and impactful responsibilities.

We support boards whose approach is consistent with creating durable, long-term value. This includes the effective corporate governance and management of material sustainability-related risks and opportunities,² as well as the consideration of the company’s key constituents including their employees, clients, suppliers, and the communities within which they operate. The board should establish and maintain a framework of robust and effective governance mechanisms to support its oversight of the company’s strategic aims. We look to the board to articulate the effectiveness of these mechanisms in overseeing the management of business risks and opportunities and the fulfillment of the company’s purpose. Disclosure of all material issues that affect the company’s long-term strategy and ability to create value is essential for shareholders to be able to appropriately understand and assess how risks are effectively identified, managed and mitigated.

Where a company has not adequately disclosed and demonstrated that they have fulfilled these responsibilities, we will consider voting against the re-election of directors whom we consider to have particular responsibility for the issue. We assess director performance on a case-by-case basis and in light of each company’s circumstances, taking into consideration our assessment of their governance, business practices that support durable, long-term value creation, and performance. In serving the interests of shareholders, the responsibility of the board of directors includes, but is not limited to, the following:

There should be clear descriptions of the role of the board and the committees of the board and how they engage with and oversee management. Set out below are ways in which boards and directors can demonstrate a commitment to acting in the best long-term economic interests of all shareholders.

We will seek to engage with the appropriate directors where we have concerns about the performance of the company, board, or individual directors and may signal outstanding concerns in our voting. While we consider these principles to be globally relevant, when assessing a board’s composition and governance processes, we consider local market norms and regulations.

It is our view that directors should stand for re-election on a regular basis, ideally annually. In our experience, annual re-elections allow shareholders to reaffirm their support for board members or hold them accountable for their decisions in a timely manner. When board members are not re-elected annually, in our experience, it is good practice for boards to have a rotation policy to ensure that, through a board cycle, all directors have had their appointment re-confirmed, with a proportion of directors being put forward for re-election at each annual general meeting.

Regular director elections also give boards the opportunity to adjust their composition in an orderly way to reflect the evolution of the company’s strategy and the market environment. In our view, it is beneficial for new directors to be brought onto the board periodically to refresh the group’s thinking and in a manner that supports both continuity and appropriate succession planning. We consider the average overall tenure of the board, where we are seeking a balance between the knowledge and experience of longer-serving members and the fresh perspectives of newer members. We encourage companies to keep under regular review the effectiveness of their board (including its size), and assess directors nominated for election or re-election in the context of the composition of the board as a whole. This assessment should consider a number of factors, including the potential need to address gaps in skills, experience, independence, and diversity.

In our view, there should be a sufficient number of independent directors, free from conflicts of interest or undue influence from connected parties, to ensure objectivity in the decision-making of the board and its ability to oversee management. Common impediments to independence may include but are not limited to:

In our experience, boards are most effective at overseeing and advising management when there is a senior independent board leader. This director may chair the board, or, where the chair is also the CEO (or is otherwise not independent), be designated as a lead independent director. The role of this director is to enhance the effectiveness of the independent members of the board through shaping the agenda, ensuring adequate information is provided to the board, and encouraging independent director participation in board deliberations. The lead independent director or another appropriate director should be available to shareholders in those situations where an independent director is best placed to explain and contextualize a company’s approach.

When nominating new directors to the board, we look to companies to provide sufficient information on the individual candidates so that shareholders can assess the suitability of each individual nominee and the overall board composition. These disclosures should give an understanding of how the collective experience and expertise of the board aligns with the company’s long-term strategy and business model. Highly qualified, engaged directors with professional characteristics relevant to a company’s business enhance the ability of the board to add value and be the voice of shareholders in board discussions. In our view, a strong board provides a competitive advantage to a company, providing valuable oversight and contributing to the most important management decisions that support long-term financial performance.

It is in this context that we are interested in diversity in the board room. We see it as a means to promoting diversity of thought and avoiding “group think” in the board’s exercise of its responsibilities to advise and oversee management. It allows boards to have deeper discussions and make more resilient decisions. We ask boards to disclose how diversity is considered in board composition, including professional characteristics, such as a director’s industry experience, specialist areas of expertise and geographic location; as well as demographic characteristics such as gender, race/ethnicity and age.

We look to understand a board’s diversity in the context of a company’s domicile, market capitalization, business model and strategy. Increasingly, we see leading boards adding members whose experience deepens the board’s understanding of the company’s customers, employees and communities. Self-identified board demographic diversity can usefully be disclosed in aggregate, consistent with local law. We believe boards should aspire to meaningful diversity of membership, at least consistent with local regulatory requirements and best practices, while recognizing that building a strong, diverse board can take time.

This position is based on our view that diversity of perspective and thought — in the board room, in the management team and throughout the company — leads to better long term economic outcomes for companies. Academic research already reveals correlations between specific dimensions of diversity and effects on decision-making processes and outcomes.⁴ In our experience, greater diversity in the board room contributes to more robust discussions and more innovative and resilient decisions. Over time, greater diversity in the board room can also promote greater diversity and resilience in the leadership team, and the workforce more broadly. That diversity can enable companies to develop businesses that more closely reflect and resonate with the customers and communities they serve.

There are matters for which the board has responsibility that may involve a conflict of interest for executives or for affiliated directors. It is our view that objective oversight of such matters is best achieved when the board forms committees comprised entirely of independent directors. In many markets, these committees of the board specialize in audit, director nominations, and compensation matters. An ad hoc committee might also be formed to decide on a special transaction, particularly one involving a related party, or to investigate a significant adverse event.

As the role and expectations of a director are increasingly demanding, directors must be able to commit an appropriate amount of time to board and committee matters. It is important that directors have the capacity to meet all of their responsibilities — including when there are unforeseen events — and therefore, they should not take on an excessive number of roles that would impair their ability to fulfill their duties.

BlackRock recognizes the critical importance of financial statements, which should provide a true and fair picture of a company’s financial condition. Accordingly, the assumptions made by management and reviewed by the auditor in preparing the financial statements should be reasonable and justified.

The accuracy of financial statements, inclusive of financial and non-financial information as required or permitted under market-specific accounting rules, is of paramount importance to BlackRock. Investors increasingly recognize that a broader range of risks and opportunities have the potential to materially impact financial performance. Over time, we anticipate investors and other users of company reporting will increasingly seek to understand and scrutinize the assumptions underlying financial statements, particularly

those that pertain to the impact of the transition to a low carbon economy on a company’s business model and asset mix. We recognize that this is an area of evolving practice and we look to international standards setters, the International Accounting Standards Board (IASB) and the International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board (IAASB) to provide additional guidance to companies.

In this context, audit committees, or equivalent, play a vital role in a company’s financial reporting system by providing independent oversight of the accounts, material financial and, where appropriate to the jurisdiction, non-financial information, internal control frameworks, and in the absence of a dedicated risk committee, Enterprise Risk Management systems. In our view, effective audit committee oversight strengthens the quality and reliability of a company’s financial statements and provides an important level of reassurance to shareholders.

We hold members of the audit committee or equivalent responsible for overseeing the management of the audit function. Audit committees or equivalent should have clearly articulated charters that set out their responsibilities and have a rotation plan in place that allows for a periodic refreshment of the committee membership to introduce fresh perspectives to audit oversight. We recognize that audit committees will rely on management, internal audit and the independent auditor in fulfilling their responsibilities but look to committee members to demonstrate they have relevant expertise to monitor and oversee those functions.

We take particular note of unexplained changes in reporting methodology, cases involving significant financial restatements, or ad hoc notifications of material financial weakness. In this respect, audit committees should provide timely disclosure on the remediation of Key and Critical Audit Matters identified either by the external auditor or internal audit function.

The integrity of financial statements depends on the auditor being free of any impediments to being an effective check on management. To that end, it is important that auditors are, and are seen to be, independent. Where an audit firm provides services to the company in addition to the audit, the fees earned should be disclosed and explained. Audit committees should have in place a procedure for assessing annually the independence of the auditor and the quality of the external audit process.

Comprehensive disclosure provides investors with a sense of the company’s long-term operational risk management practices and, more broadly, the quality of the board’s oversight. The audit committee or equivalent, or a dedicated risk committee, should periodically review the company’s risk assessment and risk management policies and the significant risks and exposures identified by management, the internal auditors or the independent accountants, and management’s steps to address them. In the absence of robust disclosures, we may reasonably conclude that companies are not adequately managing risk.

The capital structure of a company is critical to shareholders as it impacts the value of their investment and the priority of their interest in the company relative to that of other equity or debt investors. Pre-emptive rights are a key protection for shareholders against the dilution of their interests.

Effective voting rights are basic rights of share ownership. It is our view that one vote for one share as a guiding principle supports effective corporate governance. Shareholders, as the residual claimants, have the strongest interest in protecting company value, and voting rights should match economic exposure.

In principle, we disagree with the creation of a share class with equivalent economic exposure and preferential, differentiated voting rights. In our view, this structure violates the fundamental corporate governance principle of proportionality and results in a concentration of power in the hands of a few shareholders, thus disenfranchising other shareholders and amplifying any potential conflicts of interest. However, we recognize that in certain markets, at least for a period of time, companies may have a valid argument for listing dual classes of shares with differentiated voting rights. In our view, such companies should review these share class structures on a regular basis or as company circumstances change.

Additionally, they should seek shareholder approval of their capital structure on a periodic basis via a management proposal at the company’s shareholder meeting. The proposal should give unaffiliated shareholders the opportunity to affirm the current structure or establish mechanisms to end or phase out controlling structures at the appropriate time, while minimizing costs to shareholders.

In assessing mergers, asset sales, or other special transactions, BlackRock’s primary consideration is the long-term economic interests of our clients as shareholders. Boards proposing a transaction need to clearly explain the economic and strategic rationale behind it. We will review a proposed transaction to determine the degree to which it can enhance long-term shareholder value. We would prefer that proposed transactions have the unanimous support of the board and have been negotiated at arm’s length. We may seek reassurance from the board that executives’ and/or board members’ financial interests in a given transaction have not adversely affected their ability to place shareholders’ interests before their own. Where the transaction involves related parties, the recommendation to support should come from the independent directors, a best practice in most markets, and ideally, the terms should have been assessed through an independent appraisal process. In addition, it is good practice that it be approved by a separate vote of the non-conflicted parties.

As a matter of sound governance practice, shareholders should have a right to dispose of company shares in the open market without unnecessary restriction. In our view, corporate mechanisms designed to limit shareholders’ ability to sell their shares are contrary to basic property rights. Such mechanisms can serve to protect and entrench interests other than those of the shareholders. In our experience, shareholders are broadly capable of making decisions in their own best interests. We encourage any so-called “shareholder rights plans” proposed by a board to be subject to shareholder approval upon introduction and periodically thereafter.

In most markets, one of the most important roles for a company’s board of directors is to put in place a compensation structure that incentivizes and rewards executives appropriately. There should be a clear link between variable pay and operational and financial performance. Performance metrics should be stretching and aligned with a company’s strategy and business model. BIS does not have a position on the use of sustainability-related criteria, but in our view, where companies choose to include them, they should be as rigorous as other financial or operational targets. Long-term incentive plans should vest over timeframes aligned with the delivery of long-term shareholder value. Compensation committees should guard against contractual arrangements that would entitle executives to material compensation for early termination of their employment. Finally, pension contributions and other deferred compensation arrangements should be reasonable in light of market practice.

We are not supportive of one-off or special bonuses unrelated to company or individual performance. Where discretion has been used by the compensation committee or its equivalent, we expect disclosure relating to how and why the discretion was used, and how the adjusted outcome is aligned with the interests of shareholders. We acknowledge that the use of peer group evaluation by compensation committees can help ensure competitive pay; however, we are concerned when the rationale for increases in total compensation at a company is solely based on peer benchmarking rather than a rigorous measure of outperformance. We encourage companies to clearly explain how compensation outcomes have rewarded outperformance against peer firms.

We believe consideration should be given to building claw back provisions into incentive plans such that executives would be required to forgo rewards when they are not justified by actual performance and/or when compensation was based on faulty financial reporting or deceptive business practices. We also favor recoupment from any senior executive whose behavior caused material financial harm to shareholders, material reputational risk to the company, or resulted in a criminal investigation, even if such actions did not ultimately result in a material restatement of past results.

Non-executive directors should be compensated in a manner that is commensurate with the time and effort expended in fulfilling their professional responsibilities. Additionally, these compensation arrangements should not risk compromising directors’ independence or aligning their interests too closely with those of the management, whom they are charged with overseeing.

We use third party research, in addition to our own analysis, to evaluate existing and proposed compensation structures. We may vote against members of the compensation committee or equivalent board members for poor compensation practices or structures.

It is our view that well-managed companies will effectively evaluate and manage material sustainability-related risks and opportunities relevant to their businesses. Appropriate oversight of sustainability considerations is a core component of having an effective governance framework, which supports durable, long-term value creation.

Robust disclosure is essential for investors to effectively evaluate companies’ strategy and business practices related to material sustainability-related risks and opportunities. Given the increased understanding of material sustainability-related risks and opportunities and the need for better information to assess them, BlackRock advocates for continued improvement in companies’ reporting, where necessary, and will express any concerns through our voting where a company’s actions or disclosures are inadequate.

BlackRock encourages companies to use the framework developed by the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures (TCFD) to disclose their approach to ensuring they have a sustainable business model and to supplement that disclosure with industry-specific metrics such as those identified by the Sustainability Accounting Standards Board (SASB), now part of the International Sustainability Standards Board (ISSB) under the International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) Foundation.⁵ While the TCFD framework was developed to support climate-related risk disclosure, the four pillars of the TCFD governance, strategy, risk management, and metrics and targets are a useful way for companies to disclose how they identify, assess, manage, and oversee a variety of sustainability-related risks and opportunities. SASB’s industry-specific guidance (as identified in its materiality map) is beneficial in helping companies identify key performance

indicators (KPIs) across various dimensions of sustainability that are considered to be financially material and decision-useful within their industry. In particular, we encourage companies to consider reporting on nature-related factors, given the growing materiality of these issues for many businesses.⁶ We recognize that some companies may report using different standards, which may be required by regulation, or one of a number of voluntary standards. In such cases, we ask that companies highlight the metrics that are industry- or company-specific.

Climate and other sustainability-related disclosures often require companies to collect and aggregate data from various internal and external sources. We recognize that the practical realities of data-collection and reporting may not line up with financial reporting cycles and companies may require additional time after their fiscal year-end to accurately collect, analyze and report this data to investors. To give investors time to assess the data, we encourage companies to produce climate and other sustainability-related disclosures sufficiently in advance of their annual meeting.

Companies may also adopt or refer to guidance on sustainable and responsible business conduct issued by supranational organizations such as the United Nations or the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. Further, industry initiatives on managing specific operational risks may provide useful guidance to companies on best practices and disclosures. Companies should disclose any relevant global climate and other sustainability-related standards adopted, the industry initiatives in which they participate, any peer group benchmarking undertaken, and any assurance processes to help investors understand their approach to sustainable and responsible business practices.

It is our view that climate change has become a key factor in many companies’ long-term prospects. As such, as long-term investors we are interested in understanding how companies may be impacted by material climate-related risks and opportunities — just as we seek to understand other business-relevant risks and opportunities — and how these factors are considered within strategy in a manner consistent with the company’s business model and sector. Specifically, we look for companies to disclose strategies they have in place that mitigate and are resilient to any material risks to their long-term business model associated with a range of climate-related scenarios, including a scenario in which global warming is limited to well below 2°C, considering global ambitions to achieve a limit of 1.5°C.⁷ It is, of course, up to each company to define their own strategy: that is not the role of BlackRock or other investors.

BIS recognizes that climate change can be challenging for many companies, as they seek to drive long-term value by mitigating risks and capturing opportunities. A growing number of companies, financial institutions, as well as governments, have committed to advancing decarbonization in line with the Paris Agreement. There is growing consensus that companies can benefit from the more favorable macro-economic environment under an orderly, timely and equitable global energy transition.⁸ Yet the path ahead is deeply uncertain and uneven, with different parts of the economy moving at different speeds.⁹ Many companies are asking what their role should be in contributing to an orderly and equitable transition – in ensuring a reliable energy supply and energy security, and in protecting the most vulnerable from energy price shocks and economic dislocation. In this context, we encourage companies to include in their disclosure a business plan for how they intend to deliver long-term financial performance through a transition to global net zero carbon emissions, consistent with their business model and sector.

We look to companies to disclose short-, medium- and long-term targets, ideally science-based targets where these are available for their sector, for Scope 1 and 2 greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) reductions and to demonstrate how their targets are consistent with the long-term economic interests of their shareholders. Many companies have an opportunity to use and contribute to the development of low carbon energy sources and technologies that will be essential to decarbonizing the global economy over time. We also recognize that continued investment in traditional energy sources, including oil and gas, is required to maintain an orderly and equitable transition — and that divestiture of carbon-intensive assets is unlikely to contribute to global emissions reductions. We encourage companies to disclose how their capital allocation to various energy sources is consistent with their strategy.

At this stage, we view Scope 3 emissions differently from Scopes 1 and 2, given methodological complexity, regulatory uncertainty, concerns about double-counting, and lack of direct control by companies. While we welcome any disclosures and commitments companies choose to make regarding Scope 3 emissions, we recognize these are provided on a good-faith basis as methodology develops. Our publicly available commentary provides more information on our approach to climate risk.

In order to advance long-term shareholders’ interests, companies should consider the interests of the various parties on whom they depend for their success over time. It is for each company to determine their key stakeholders based on what is material to their business and long-term financial performance. Most commonly, key stakeholders include employees, business partners (such as suppliers and distributors), clients and consumers, regulators, and the communities in which they operate.

Considering the interests of key stakeholders recognizes the collective nature of long-term value creation and the extent to which each company’s prospects for growth are tied to its ability to foster strong sustainable relationships with and support from those stakeholders. Companies should articulate how they address adverse impacts that could arise from their business practices and affect critical business relationships with their stakeholders. We encourage companies to implement, to the extent appropriate, monitoring processes (often referred to as due diligence) to identify and mitigate potential adverse impacts and grievance mechanisms to remediate any actual adverse material impacts. In our view, maintaining trust within these relationships can contribute to a company’s long-term success.

As a long-term shareholder on behalf of our clients, we find it helpful when companies disclose how they have identified their key stakeholders and considered their interests in business decision-making. We are also interested to understand the role of the board, which is well positioned to ensure that the approach taken is informed by and aligns with the company’s strategy and purpose.

It is our view that shareholders have a right to material and timely information on the financial performance and viability of the companies in which they invest. In addition, companies should publish information on the governance structures in place and the rights of shareholders to influence these structures. The reporting and disclosure provided by companies help shareholders assess whether their economic interests have been protected and the quality of the board’s oversight of management. We believe shareholders should have the right to vote on key corporate governance matters, including changes to governance mechanisms, to submit proposals to the shareholders’ meeting, and to call special meetings of shareholders.

In our view, it is the responsibility of the board to determine the corporate form that is most appropriate given the company’s purpose and business model.¹⁰ Companies proposing to change their corporate form to a public benefit corporation or similar entity should put it to a shareholder vote if not already required to do so under applicable law. Supporting documentation from companies or shareholder proponents proposing to alter the corporate form should clearly articulate how the interests of shareholders and different stakeholders would be impacted as well as the accountability and voting mechanisms that would be available to shareholders. As a fiduciary on behalf of clients, we generally support management proposals if our analysis indicates that shareholders’ interests are adequately protected. Relevant shareholder proposals are evaluated on a case-by-case basis.

In most markets in which BlackRock invests on behalf of clients, shareholders have the right to submit proposals to be voted on by shareholders at a company’s annual or extraordinary meeting, as long as eligibility and procedural requirements are met. The matters that we see put forward by shareholders address a wide range of topics, including governance reforms, capital management, and improvements in the management or disclosure of sustainability-related risks.

BlackRock is subject to certain requirements under antitrust law in the United States that place restrictions and limitations on how BlackRock can interact with the companies in which we invest on behalf of our clients, including our ability to submit shareholder proposals. As noted above, we can vote, on behalf of clients who authorize us to do so, on proposals put forth by others.

When assessing shareholder proposals, we evaluate each proposal on its merit, with a singular focus on its implications for long-term value creation. We consider the business and economic relevance of the issue raised, as well as its materiality and the urgency with which we believe it should be addressed. We take into consideration the legal effect of the proposal, as shareholder proposals may be advisory or legally binding depending on the jurisdiction. We would not support proposals that we believe would result in over-reaching into the basic business decisions of the company.

Where a proposal is focused on a material governance or sustainability-related risk that we agree needs to be addressed and the intended outcome is consistent with long-term value creation, we will look to the board and management to demonstrate that the company has met the intent of the request made in the shareholder proposal. Where our analysis and/or engagement indicate an opportunity for improvement in the company’s approach to the issue, we may support shareholder proposals that are reasonable and not unduly prescriptive or constraining on management. Alternatively, or in addition, we may vote against the re-election of one or more directors if, in our assessment, the board has not responded sufficiently or with an appropriate sense of urgency. While we may not agree with all aspects of a shareholder proponent’s views or all facets of the proponent’s supporting statement, we may still support proposals that address material governance or sustainability-related risks where we believe it would be helpful for shareholders to have more detailed information on how those risks are identified, monitored, and managed to support a company’s ability to deliver long-term financial returns. We may also support a proposal if management is on track, but we believe that voting in favor might accelerate progress.

BlackRock maintains three regional advisory committees (Stewardship Advisory Committees) for a) the Americas; b) Europe, the Middle East and Africa (EMEA); and c) Asia-Pacific, generally consisting of senior BlackRock investment professionals and/or senior employees with practical boardroom experience. The regional Stewardship Advisory Committees review and advise on amendments to BIS proxy voting guidelines covering markets within each respective region (Guidelines). The advisory committees do not determine voting decisions, which are the responsibility of BIS.

In addition to the regional Stewardship Advisory Committees, the Investment Stewardship Global Oversight Committee (Global Committee) is a risk-focused committee, comprised of senior representatives from various BlackRock investment teams, a senior legal representative, the Global Head of Investment Stewardship (Global Head), and other senior executives with relevant experience and team oversight. The Global Oversight Committee does not determine voting decisions, which are the responsibility of BIS.

The Global Head has primary oversight of the activities of BIS, including voting in accordance with the Guidelines, which require the application of professional judgment and consideration of each company’s unique circumstances. The Global Committee reviews and approves amendments to these Principles. The Global Committee also reviews and approves amendments to the regional Guidelines, as proposed by the regional Stewardship Advisory Committees.

In addition, the Global Committee receives and reviews periodic reports regarding the votes cast by BIS, as well as updates on material process issues, procedural changes, and other risk oversight considerations. The Global Committee reviews these reports in an oversight capacity as informed by the BIS corporate governance engagement program and the Guidelines.

BIS carries out engagement with companies, monitors and executes proxy votes, and conducts vote operations (including maintaining records of votes cast) in a manner consistent with the relevant Guidelines. BIS also conducts research on corporate governance issues and participates in industry discussions to contribute to and keep abreast of important developments in the corporate governance field. BIS may utilize third parties for certain of the foregoing activities and performs oversight of those third parties. BIS may raise complicated or particularly controversial matters for internal discussion with the relevant investment teams and governance specialists for discussion and guidance prior to making a voting decision.

BlackRock votes on proxy issues when our clients authorize us to do so. We offer certain clients who prefer their holdings to be voted consistent with specific values or views Voting Choice.¹¹ When BlackRock votes on behalf of our clients, we carefully consider proxies submitted to funds and other fiduciary account(s) (Fund or Funds) for which we have voting authority. BlackRock votes (or refrains from voting) proxies for each Fund for which we have voting authority based on our evaluation of the best long-term economic interests of our clients as shareholders, in the exercise of our independent business judgment, and without regard to the relationship of the issuer of the proxy (or any shareholder proponent or dissident shareholder) to the Fund, the Fund’s affiliates (if any), BlackRock or BlackRock’s affiliates, or BlackRock employees (see “Conflicts management policies and procedures”, below).

When exercising voting rights, BlackRock will normally vote on specific proxy issues in accordance with the Guidelines for the relevant market. The Guidelines are reviewed annually and are amended consistent with changes in the local market practice, as developments in corporate governance occur, or as otherwise deemed advisable by the applicable Stewardship Advisory Committees. BIS analysts may, in the exercise of their professional judgment, conclude that the Guidelines do not cover the specific matter upon which a proxy vote is required or that an exception to the Guidelines would be in the best long-term economic interests of BlackRock’s clients.

In the uncommon circumstance of there being a vote with respect to fixed income securities or the securities of privately held issuers, the decision generally will be made by a Fund’s portfolio managers and/or BIS based on their assessment of the particular transactions or other matters at issue.

In certain markets, proxy voting involves logistical issues which can affect BlackRock’s ability to vote such proxies, as well as the desirability of voting such proxies. These issues include, but are not limited to: i) untimely notice of shareholder meetings; ii) restrictions on a foreigner’s ability to exercise votes; iii) requirements to vote proxies in person; iv) “share-blocking” (requirements that investors who exercise their voting rights surrender the right to dispose of their holdings for some specified period in proximity to the shareholder meeting); v) potential difficulties in translating the proxy; vi) regulatory constraints; and vii) requirements to provide local agents with unrestricted powers of attorney to facilitate voting instructions. We are not supportive of impediments to the exercise of voting rights such as share-blocking or overly burdensome administrative requirements.

As a consequence, BlackRock votes proxies in these situations on a “best-efforts” basis. In addition, BIS may determine that it is generally in the best interests of BlackRock’s clients not to vote proxies (or not to vote our full allocation) if the costs (including but not limited to opportunity costs associated with share-blocking constraints) associated with exercising a vote are expected to outweigh the benefit the client would derive by voting on the proposal.

Portfolio managers have full discretion to vote the shares in the Funds they manage based on their analysis of the economic impact of a particular ballot item on their investors. Portfolio managers may, from time to time, reach differing views on how best to maximize economic value with respect to a particular investment. Therefore, portfolio managers may, and sometimes do, vote shares in the Funds under their management differently from BIS or from one another. However, because BlackRock’s clients are mostly long-term investors with long-term economic goals, ballots are frequently cast in a uniform manner.

BIS maintains policies and procedures that seek to prevent undue influence on BlackRock’s proxy voting activity. Such influence might stem from any relationship between the investee company (or any shareholder proponent or dissident shareholder) and BlackRock, BlackRock’s affiliates, a Fund or a Fund’s affiliates, or BlackRock employees. The following are examples of sources of perceived or potential conflicts of interest:

BlackRock has taken certain steps to mitigate perceived or potential conflicts including, but not limited to, the following:

In selecting a voting service provider, we assess several characteristics, including but not limited to: independence, an ability to analyze proxy issues and make recommendations in the best economic interest of our clients in accordance with the Guidelines, reputation for reliability and integrity, and operational capacity to accurately deliver the assigned recommendations in a timely manner. We may engage more than one voting service provider, in part to mitigate potential or perceived conflicts of interest at a single voting service provider. The Global Committee appoints and reviews the performance of the voting service providers, generally on an annual basis.

When so authorized, BlackRock acts as a securities lending agent on behalf of Funds. Securities lending is a well-regulated practice that contributes to capital market efficiency. It also enables funds to generate additional returns for a fund, while allowing fund providers to keep fund expenses lower.

With regard to the relationship between securities lending and proxy voting, BlackRock’s approach is informed by our fiduciary responsibility to act in our clients’ best interests. In most cases, BlackRock anticipates that the potential long-term value to the Fund of voting shares would be less than the potential revenue the loan may provide the Fund. However, in certain instances, BlackRock may determine, in its independent business judgment as a fiduciary, that the value of voting outweighs the securities lending revenue loss to clients and would therefore recall shares to be voted in those instances.

The decision to recall securities on loan as part of BlackRock’s securities lending program in order to vote is based on an evaluation of various factors that include, but are not limited to, assessing potential securities lending revenue alongside the potential long-term value to clients of voting those securities (based on the information available at the time of recall consideration).¹² BIS works with colleagues in the Securities Lending and Risk and Quantitative Analysis teams to evaluate the costs and benefits to clients of recalling shares on loan.

Periodically, BlackRock reviews our process for determining whether to recall securities on loan in order to vote and may modify it as necessary.

The issue-specific Guidelines published for each region/country in which we vote are intended to summarize BlackRock’s general philosophy and approach to issues that may commonly arise in the proxy voting context in each market where we invest. The Guidelines are not intended to be exhaustive. BIS applies the Guidelines on a case-by-case basis, in the context of the individual circumstances of each company and the specific issue under review. As such, the Guidelines do not indicate how BIS will vote in every instance. Rather, they reflect our view about corporate governance issues generally, and provide insight into how we typically approach issues that commonly arise on corporate ballots.

We are committed to transparency in the stewardship work we do on behalf of clients. We inform clients about our engagement and voting policies and activities through direct communication and through disclosure on our website. Each year we publish an annual report that provides a global overview of our investment stewardship engagement and voting activities and a voting spotlight that summarizes our voting over a proxy year.¹³ Additionally, we make public our market-specific voting guidelines for the benefit of clients and companies with whom we engage. We also publish commentaries to share our perspective on market developments and emerging key themes.

At a more granular level, we publish quarterly our vote record for each company that held a shareholder meeting during the period, showing how we voted on each proposal and explaining any votes against management proposals or on shareholder proposals. For shareholder meetings where a vote might be high profile or of significant interest to clients, we may publish a vote bulletin after the meeting, disclosing and explaining our vote on key proposals. We also publish a quarterly list of all companies with which we engaged and the key topics addressed in the engagement meeting.

In this way, we help inform our clients about the work we do on their behalf in promoting the governance and business models that support durable, long-term value creation.

These guidelines should be read in conjunction with the BlackRock Investment Stewardship Global Principles.

As stewards of our clients’ investments, BlackRock believes it has a responsibility to engage with management teams and/or board members on material business issues and, for those clients who have given us authority, to vote proxies in the best long-term economic interests of their assets.

The following issue-specific proxy voting guidelines (the “Guidelines”) summarize BlackRock Investment Stewardship’s (“BIS”) philosophy and approach to engagement and voting, as well as our view of governance best practices and the roles and responsibilities of boards and directors for publicly listed U.S. companies. These Guidelines are not intended to limit the analysis of individual issues at specific companies or provide a guide to how BIS will engage and/or vote in every instance. They are to be applied with discretion, taking into consideration the range of issues and facts specific to the company, as well as individual ballot items at shareholder meetings.

These guidelines are divided into eight key themes, which group together the issues that frequently appear on the agenda of shareholder meetings:

An effective and well-functioning board is critical to the economic success of the company and the protection of shareholders’ interests, inducting the establishment of appropriate governance structures that facilitate oversight of management and the company’s strategic initiatives. As part of their responsibilities, board members owe fiduciary duties to shareholders in overseeing the strategic direction, operations, and risk management of the company. For this reason, BIS sees engagement with and the election of directors as one of our most critical responsibilities.

Disclosure of material issues that affect the company’s long-term strategy and value creation, including, when relevant, material sustainability-related factors, is essential for shareholders to appropriately understand and assess how effectively the board is identifying, managing, and mitigating risks.

Where a company has not adequately demonstrated, through actions and/or disclosures, how material issues are appropriately identified, managed, and overseen, we will consider voting against the re-election of those directors responsible for the oversight of such issues, as indicated below.

It is our view that a majority of the directors on the board should be independent to ensure objectivity in the decision-making of the board and its ability to oversee management. In addition, all members of audit, compensation, and nominating/governance committees should be independent. Our view of independence may vary from listing standards.

The board should exercise appropriate oversight of management and the business activities of the company. Where we determine that a board has failed to do so in a way that may impede a company’s long-term value, we may vote against the responsible committees and/or individual directors.

In addition, we recognize that board leadership roles may vary in responsibility and time requirements in different markets around the world. In particular, where a director maintains a Chair role of a publicly listed company in European markets, we may consider that responsibility as equal to two board commitments, consistent with our EMEA Proxy Voting Guidelines. We will take the total number of board commitments across our global policies into account for director elections.

Companies should have an established process for identifying, monitoring, and managing business and material risks. Independent directors should have access to relevant management information and outside advice, as appropriate, to ensure they can properly oversee risk. We encourage companies to provide transparency around risk management, mitigation, and reporting to the board. We are particularly interested in understanding how risk oversight processes evolve in response to changes in corporate strategy and/or shifts in the business and related risk environment. Comprehensive disclosures provide investors with a sense of the company’s long-term risk management practices and, more broadly, the quality of the board’s oversight. In the absence of robust disclosures, we may reasonably conclude that companies are not adequately managing risk.

Directors should be re-elected annually; classification of the board generally limits shareholders’ rights to regularly evaluate a board’s performance and select directors. While we will typically support proposals requesting board de-classification, we may make exceptions, should the board articulate an appropriate strategic rationale for a classified board structure. This may include when a company needs consistency and stability during a time of transition, e.g., newly public companies or companies undergoing a strategic restructuring. A classified board structure may also be justified at non-operating companies, e.g., closed-end funds or business development companies (“BDC”),¹⁶ in certain circumstances. However, in these instances, boards should periodically review the rationale for a classified structure and consider when annual elections might be more appropriate.

Without a voting mechanism to immediately address concerns about a specific director, we may choose to vote against the directors up for election at the time (see “Shareholder rights” for additional detail).

There are two commonly accepted structures for independent leadership to balance the CEO role in the boardroom: 1) an independent Chair; or 2) a Lead Independent director when the roles of Chair and CEO are combined, or when the Chair is otherwise not independent.

In the absence of a significant governance concern, we defer to boards to designate the most appropriate leadership structure to ensure adequate balance and independence.¹⁷ However, BIS may vote against the most senior non-executive member of the board when appropriate independence is lacking in designated leadership roles.

In the event that the board chooses to have a combined Chair/CEO or a non-independent Chair, we support the designation of a Lead Independent director, with the ability to: 1) provide formal input into board meeting agendas; 2) call meetings of the independent directors; and 3) preside at meetings of independent directors. These roles and responsibilities should be disclosed and easily accessible.

The following table illustrates examples¹⁸ of responsibilities under each board leadership model:

Companies should have a robust CEO and senior management succession plan in place at the board level that is reviewed and updated on a regular basis. Succession planning should cover scenarios over both the long-term, consistent with the strategic direction of the company and identified leadership needs over time, as well as the short-term, in the event of an unanticipated executive departure. We encourage the company to explain their executive succession planning process, including where accountability lies within the boardroom for this task, without prematurely divulging sensitive information commonly associated with this exercise.

During a CEO transition, companies may elect for the departing CEO to maintain a role in the boardroom. We ask for disclosures to understand the timeframe and responsibilities of this role. In such instances, we typically look for the board to have appropriate independent leadership structures in place. (See chart above.)

Compensation for directors should generally be structured to attract and retain directors, while also aligning their interests with those of shareholders. In our view, director compensation packages that are based on the company’s long-term value creation and include some form of long-term equity compensation are more likely to meet this goal.

We encourage boards to periodically review director qualifications and skills to ensure relevant experience and diverse perspectives are represented in the boardroom. To this end, performance reviews and skills assessments should be conducted by the nominating/governance committee or the Lead Independent Director. This process may include internal board evaluations; however, boards may also find it useful to periodically conduct an assessment with a third party. We encourage boards to disclose their approach to evaluations, including objectives of the evaluation; if an external party conducts the evaluation; the frequency of the evaluations; and, whether that evaluation occurs on an individual director basis.

Where boards find that age limits or term limits are the most efficient and objective mechanism for ensuring periodic board refreshment, we generally defer to the board’s determination in setting such limits. BIS will also consider the average board tenure to evaluate processes for board renewal. We may oppose boards that appear to have an insufficient mix of short-, medium-, and long-tenured directors.

As noted above, highly qualified, engaged directors with professional characteristics relevant to a company’s business enhance the ability of the board to add value and be the voice of shareholders in board discussions. In our view, a strong board provides a competitive advantage to a company, providing valuable oversight and contributing to the most important management decisions that support long-term financial performance.

It is in this context that we are interested in diversity in the boardroom. We see it as a means to promoting diversity of thought and avoiding ‘group think’ in the board’s exercise of its responsibilities to advise and oversee management. It allows boards to have deeper discussions and make more resilient decisions. We ask boards to disclose how diversity is considered in board composition, including professional characteristics, such as a director’s industry experience, specialist areas of expertise and geographic location; as well as demographic characteristics such as gender, race/ethnicity, and age.

We look to understand a board’s diversity in the context of a company’s domicile, market capitalization, business model, and strategy. Increasingly, we see leading boards adding members whose experience deepens the board’s understanding of the company’s customers, employees, and communities. Self-identified board demographic diversity can usefully be disclosed in aggregate, consistent with local law. We believe boards should aspire to meaningful diversity of membership, at least consistent with local regulatory requirements and best practices, while recognizing that building a strong, diverse board can take time.

This position is based on our view that diversity of perspective and thought — in the boardroom, in the management team and throughout the company — leads to better long-term economic outcomes for companies. Academic and other research reveals correlations between specific dimensions of diversity and effects on decision-making processes and outcomes.¹⁹ In our experience, greater diversity in the boardroom contributes to more robust discussions and more innovative and resilient decisions. Over time, greater diversity in the boardroom can also promote greater diversity and resilience in the leadership team, and the workforce more broadly. That diversity can enable companies to develop businesses that more closely reflect and resonate with the customers and communities they serve.

In the U.S., we believe that boards should aspire to at least 30% diversity of membership,²⁰ and we encourage large companies, such as those in the S&P 500, to lead in achieving this standard. In our view, an informative indicator of diversity for such companies is having at least two women and a director who identifies as a member of an underrepresented group.²¹ We recognize that it may take time and that companies with smaller market capitalizations and in certain sectors may face more challenges in pursuing diversity. Among these smaller companies, we look for the presence of diversity and take into consideration the progress that companies are making.

In order to help investors understand overall diversity, we look to boards to disclose:

To the extent that, based on our assessment of corporate disclosures, a company has not adequately explained their approach to diversity in their board composition, we may vote against members of the nominating/governance committee. Our publicly available commentary provides more information on our approach to board diversity.

We typically defer to the board in setting the appropriate size and believe that directors are generally in the best position to assess the optimal board size to ensure effectiveness. However, we may vote against the appropriate committees and/or individual directors if, in our view, the board is ineffective in its oversight, either because it is too small to allow for the necessary range of skills and experience or too large to function efficiently.

Where we determine that a board has not acted in the best interests of the company’s shareholders, or takes action to unreasonably limit shareholder rights, we may vote against the appropriate committees and/or individual directors. Common circumstances are illustrated below:

A board should be engaged and responsive to the company’s shareholders, including acknowledging voting outcomes for director elections, compensation, shareholder proposals, and other ballot items. Where we determine that a board has not substantially addressed shareholder concerns that we deem material to the business, we may vote against the responsible committees and/or individual directors. Common circumstances are illustrated below:

Directors should generally be elected by a majority of the shares voted. We will normally support proposals seeking to introduce bylaws requiring a majority vote standard for director elections. Majority vote standards generally assist in ensuring that directors who are not broadly supported by shareholders are not elected to serve as their representatives. As a best practice, companies with either a majority vote standard or a plurality vote standard should adopt a resignation policy for directors who do not receive support from at least a majority of votes cast. Where the company already has a sufficiently robust majority voting process in place, we may not support a shareholder proposal seeking an alternative mechanism.

We note that majority voting may not be appropriate in all circumstances, for example, in the context of a contested election, or for majority-controlled companies or those with concentrated ownership structures.

As stated above, a majority vote standard is generally in the best long-term interests of shareholders, as it ensures director accountability through the requirement to be elected by more than half of the votes cast. As such, we will generally oppose proposals requesting the adoption of cumulative voting, which may disproportionately aggregate votes on certain issues or director candidates.

BIS recognizes the critical importance of financial statements to provide a complete and accurate portrayal of a company’s financial condition. Consistent with our approach to voting on directors, we seek to hold the audit committee of the board responsible for overseeing the management of the independent auditor and the internal audit function at a company.

We may vote against the audit committee members where the board has failed to facilitate quality, independent auditing. We look to public disclosures for insight into the scope of the audit committee responsibilities, including an overview of audit committee processes, issues on the audit committee agenda, and key decisions taken by the audit committee. We take particular note of cases involving significant financial restatements or material weakness disclosures, and we look for timely disclosure and remediation of accounting irregularities.

The integrity of financial statements depends on the auditor effectively fulfilling its role. To that end, we favor an independent auditor. In addition, to the extent that an auditor fails to reasonably identify and address issues that eventually lead to a significant financial restatement, or the audit firm has violated standards of practice, we may also vote against ratification.

From time to time, shareholder proposals may be presented to promote auditor independence or the rotation of audit firms. We may support these proposals when they are consistent with our views as described above.

In our view, shareholders should be entitled to voting rights in proportion to their economic interests. In addition, companies that have implemented dual or multiple class share structures should review these structures on a regular basis, or as company circumstances change. Companies with multiple share classes should receive shareholder approval of their capital structure on a periodic basis via a management proposal on the company’s proxy. The proposal should give unaffiliated shareholders the opportunity to affirm the current structure or establish mechanisms to end or phase out controlling structures at the appropriate time, while minimizing costs to shareholders. Where companies are unwilling to voluntarily implement “one share, one vote” within a specified timeframe, or are unresponsive to shareholder feedback for change over time, we generally support shareholder proposals to recapitalize stock into a single voting class.

We frequently oppose proposals requesting authorization of a class of preferred stock with unspecified voting, conversion, dividend distribution, and other rights (“blank check” preferred stock) because they may serve as a transfer of authority from shareholders to the board and as a possible entrenchment device. We generally view the board’s discretion to establish voting rights on a when-issued basis as a potential anti-takeover device, as it affords the board the ability to place a block of stock with an investor sympathetic to management, thereby foiling a takeover bid without a shareholder vote.

BIS will evaluate requests to increase authorized shares on a case-by-case basis, in conjunction with industry-specific norms and potential dilution, as well as a company’s history with respect to the use of its common shares.

We generally support proposals to increase or issue preferred stock in cases where the company specifies the voting, dividend, conversion, and other rights of such stock and where the terms of the preferred stock appear reasonable.

We generally support stock splits that are not likely to negatively affect the ability to trade shares or the economic value of a share. We generally support reverse stock splits that are designed to avoid delisting or to facilitate trading in the stock, where the reverse split will not have a negative impact on share value (e.g., one class is reduced while others remain at pre-split levels). In the event of a proposal for a reverse split that would not proportionately reduce the company’s authorized stock, we apply the same analysis we would use for a proposal to increase authorized stock.

In assessing mergers, acquisitions, or other transactions — including business combinations involving Special Purpose Acquisition Companies (“SPACs”) — BIS’ primary consideration is the long-term economic interests of our clients as shareholders. Boards should clearly explain the economic and strategic rationale for any proposed transactions or material changes to the business. We will review a proposed transaction to determine the degree to which it has the potential to enhance long-term shareholder value. While mergers, acquisitions, asset sales, business combinations, and other special transaction proposals vary widely in scope and substance, we closely examine certain salient features in our analyses, such as:

Contested elections and other special situations²² are assessed on a case-by-case basis. We evaluate a number of factors, which may include: the qualifications and past performance of the dissident and management candidates; the validity of the concerns identified by the dissident; the viability of both the dissident’s and management’s plans; the ownership stake and holding period of the dissident; the likelihood that the dissident’s strategy will produce the desired change; and whether the dissident represents the best option for enhancing long-term shareholder value.

We will evaluate the actions that the company has taken to limit shareholders’ ability to exercise the right to nominate dissident director candidates, including those actions taken absent the immediate threat of a contested situation. BIS may take voting action against directors(up to and including the full board) where those actions are viewed as egregiously infringing on shareholder rights. We will consider a variety of possible voting outcomes in contested situations, including the ability to support a mix of management and dissident nominees.

Where a poison pill is put to a shareholder vote by management, our policy is to examine these plans individually. Although we have historically opposed most plans, we may support plans that include a reasonable “qualifying offer clause.” Such clauses typically require shareholder ratification of the pill and stipulate a sunset provision whereby the pill expires unless it is renewed. These clauses also tend to specify that an all-cash bid for all shares that includes a fairness opinion and evidence of financing does not trigger the pill, but forces either a special meeting at which the offer is put to a shareholder vote or requires the board to seek the written consent of shareholders, where shareholders could rescind the pill at their discretion. We may also support a pill where it is the only effective method for protecting tax or other economic benefits that may be associated with limiting the ownership changes of individual shareholders. Lastly, we look for shareholder approval of poison pill plans within one year of adoption of implementation.

We generally do not support shareholder proposals seeking the reimbursement of proxy contest expenses, even in situations where we support the shareholder campaign. Introducing the possibility of such reimbursement may incentivize disruptive and unnecessary shareholder campaigns.

A company’s board of directors should put in place a compensation structure that balances incentivizing, rewarding, and retaining executives appropriately across a wide range of business outcomes. This structure should be aligned with shareholder interests, particularly the generation of sustainable, long-term value.

The compensation committee should carefully consider the specific circumstances of the company and the key individuals the board is focused on incentivizing. We encourage companies to ensure that their compensation plans incorporate appropriate and rigorous performance metrics, consistent with corporate strategy and market practice. Performance-based compensation should include metrics that are relevant to the business and stated strategy and/or risk mitigation efforts. Goals, and the processes used to set these goals, should be clearly articulated and appropriately rigorous. We use third party research, in addition to our own

analysis, to evaluate existing and proposed compensation structures. We hold members of the compensation committee, or equivalent board members, accountable for poor compensation practices and/or structures.

There should be a clear link between variable pay and company performance that drives sustained value creation for our clients as shareholders. Where compensation structures provide for a front-loaded²³ award, we look for appropriate structures(including vesting and/or holding periods) that motivate sustained performance for shareholders over a number of years. We generally do not favor programs focused on awards that require performance levels to be met and maintained for a relatively short time period for payouts to be earned, unless there are extended vesting and/or holding requirements.

Compensation structures should generally drive outcomes that align the pay of the executives with performance of the company and the value received by shareholders. When evaluating performance, we examine both executive teams’ efforts, as well as outcomes realized by shareholders. Payouts to executives should reflect both the executive’s contributions to the company’s ongoing success, as well as exogenous factors that impacted shareholder value. Where discretion has been used by the compensation committee, we look for disclosures relating to how and why the discretion was used and how the adjusted outcome is aligned with the interests of shareholders. While we believe special awards²⁴ should be used sparingly, we acknowledge that there may be instances when such awards are appropriate. When evaluating these awards, we consider a variety of factors, including the magnitude and structure of the award, the scope of award recipients, the alignment of the grant with shareholder value, and the company’s historical use of such awards, in addition to other company-specific circumstances.

We acknowledge that the use of peer group evaluation by compensation committees can help calibrate competitive pay; however, we are concerned when the rationale for increases in total compensation is solely based on peer benchmarking.

We support incentive plans that foster the sustainable achievement of results — both financial and non-financial — consistent with the company’s strategic initiatives. Compensation committees should guard against contractual arrangements that would entitle executives to material compensation for early termination of their contract. Finally, pension contributions and other deferred compensation arrangements should be reasonable in light of market practices. Our publicly available commentary provides more information on our approach to executive compensation.

Where executive compensation appears excessive relative to the performance of the company and/or compensation paid by peers, or where an equity compensation plan is not aligned with shareholders’ interests, we may vote against members of the compensation committee.

In cases where there is a “Say on Pay” vote, BIS will respond to the proposal as informed by our evaluation of compensation practices at that particular company and in a manner that appropriately addresses the specific question posed to shareholders. Where we conclude that a company has failed to align pay with performance, we will vote against the management compensation proposal and relevant compensation committee members.

BIS will generally support annual advisory votes on executive compensation. It is our view that shareholders should have the opportunity to express feedback on annual incentive programs and changes to long-term compensation before multiple cycles are issued. Where a company has failed to implement a “Say on Pay” advisory vote within the frequency period that received the most support from shareholders or a “Say on Pay” resolution is omitted without explanation, BIS may vote against members of the compensation committee.

We generally favor prompt recoupment from any senior executive whose compensation was based on faulty financial reporting or deceptive business practices. We also favor prompt recoupment from any senior executive whose behavior caused material financial harm to shareholders, material reputational risk to the company, or resulted in a criminal proceeding, even if such actions did not ultimately result in a material restatement of past results. This includes, but is not limited to, settlement agreements arising from such behavior and paid for directly by the company. We typically support shareholder proposals on these matters unless the company already has a robust clawback policy that sufficiently addresses our concerns.

Employee stock purchase plans(“ESPP”) are an important part of a company’s overall human capital management strategy and can provide performance incentives to help align employees’ interests with those of shareholders. The most common form of ESPP qualifies for favorable tax treatment under Section 423 of the Internal Revenue Code. We will typically support qualified ESPP proposals.

BIS supports equity plans that align the economic interests of directors, managers, and other employees with those of shareholders. Boards should establish policies prohibiting the use of equity awards in a manner that could disrupt the intended alignment with shareholder interests, such as the excessive pledging or heading of stock. We may support shareholder proposals requesting the establishment of such policies.

Our evaluation of equity compensation plans is based on a company’s executive pay and performance relative to peers and whether the plan plays a significant role in a pay-for-performance disconnect. We generally oppose plans that contain “evergreen” provisions, which allow for automatic annual increases of shares available for grant without requiring further shareholder approval; we note that the aggregate impacts of such increases are difficult to predict and may lead to significant dilution. We also generally oppose plans that allow for repricing without shareholder approval. We may oppose plans that provide for the acceleration of vesting of equity awards even in situations where an actual change of control may not occur. We encourage companies to structure their change of control provisions to require the termination of the covered employee before acceleration or special payments are triggered (commonly referred to as “double trigger” change of control provisions).

We generally view golden parachutes as encouragement to management to consider transactions that might be beneficial to shareholders. However, a large potential payout under a golden parachute arrangement also presents the risk of motivating a management team to support a sub-optimal sale price for a company.

When determining whether to support or oppose an advisory vote on a golden parachute plan, BIS may consider several factors, including:

We may support shareholder proposals requesting that implementation of such arrangements require shareholder approval.

There may be legitimate instances where underwater options create an overhang on a company’s capital structure and a repricing or option exchange may be warranted. We will evaluate these instances on a case-by-case basis. BIS may support a request to reprice or exchange underwater options under the following circumstances:

BIS may support shareholder proposals requesting to put extraordinary benefits contained in supplemental executive retirement plans(“SERP”) to a shareholder vote unless the company’s executive pension plans do not contain excessive benefits beyond what is offered under employee-wide plans.

It is our view that well-run companies, where appropriate, effectively evaluate and manage material sustainability-related risks and opportunities²⁵ as a core component of their long-term value creation for shareholder and business strategy. At the board level, appropriate governance structures and responsibilities allow for effective oversight of the strategic implementation of material sustainability issues.

When assessing how to vote– including on the election of directors and relevant shareholder proposals — robust disclosures are essential for investors to understand, where appropriate, how companies are integrating material sustainability risks and opportunities across their business and strategic, long-term planning. Where a company has failed to appropriately provide robust disclosures and evidence of effective business practices, BIS may express concerns through our engagement and voting. As part of this consideration, we encourage companies to produce sustainability-related disclosures sufficiently in advance of their annual meeting so that the disclosures can be considered in relevant vote decisions.

We encourage disclosures aligned with the reporting framework developed by the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures (TCFD), supported by industry-specific metrics, such as those identified by the Sustainability Accounting Standards Board (SASB), now part of the International Sustainability Standards Board (ISSB) under the International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) Foundation.²⁶ While the TCFD framework was developed to support climate-related risk disclosures, the four pillars of the TCFD — governance, strategy, risk management, and metrics and targets — are a useful way for companies to disclose how they identify, assess, manage, and oversee a variety of sustainability-related risks and opportunities. SASB’s²⁷ industry-specific metrics are beneficial in helping companies identify key performance indicators (“KPIs”) across various dimensions of sustainability that are considered to be financially material. We recognize that some companies may report using different standards, which may be required by regulation, or one of a number of private standards. In such cases, we ask that companies highlight the metrics that are industry- or company-specific.

Companies should also disclose any material supranational standards adopted, the industry initiatives in which they participate, any peer group benchmarking undertaken, and any assurance processes to help investors understand their approach to sustainable and responsible business conduct.

It is our view that climate change has become a key factor in many companies’ long-term prospects. As such, as long-term investors, we are interested in understanding how companies may be impacted by material climate-related risks and opportunities — just as we seek to understand other business-relevant risks and opportunities — and how these factors are considered within their strategy in a manner that is consistent with the company’s business model and sector. Specifically, we look for companies to disclose strategies that they have in place that mitigate and are resilient to any material risks to their long-term business model associated with a range of climate-related scenarios, including a scenario in which global warming is limited to well below 2°C, and considering global ambitions to achieve a limit of 1.5°C.²⁸ It is, of course, up to each company to define their own strategy: that is not the role of BlackRock or other investors.

BIS recognizes that climate change can be challenging for many companies, as they seek to drive long-term value by mitigating risks and capturing opportunities. A growing number of companies, financial institutions, as well as governments, have committed to advancing decarbonization in line with the Paris Agreement. There is growing consensus that companies can benefit from the more favorable macro-economic environment under an orderly, timely, and equitable global energy transition.²⁹ Yet, the path ahead is deeply uncertain and uneven, with different parts of the economy moving at different speeds.³⁰ Many companies are asking what their role should be in contributing to an orderly and equitable transition — in ensuring a reliable energy supply and energy security and in protecting the most vulnerable from energy price shocks and economic dislocation. In this context, we encourage companies to include in their disclosures a business plan for how they intend to deliver long-term financial performance through a transition to global net zero carbon emissions, consistent with their business model and sector.

We look to companies to disclose short-, medium-, and long-term targets, ideally science-based targets where these are available for their sector, for Scope 1 and 2 greenhouse gas emissions(GHG) reductions and to demonstrate how their targets are consistent with the long-term economic interests of their shareholders. Many companies have an opportunity to use and contribute to the development of low carbon energy sources and technologies that will be essential to decarbonizing the global economy over time. We also recognize that continued investment in traditional energy sources, including oil and gas, is required to maintain an orderly and equitable transition — and that divestiture of carbon-intensive assets is unlikely to contribute to global emissions reductions. We encourage companies to disclose how their capital allocation to various energy sources is consistent with their strategy.

At this stage, we view Scope 3 emissions differently from Scopes 1 and 2, given methodological complexity, regulatory uncertainty, concerns about double-counting, and lack of direct control by companies. While we welcome any disclosures and commitments companies choose to make regarding Scope 3 emissions, we recognize that these are provided on a good-faith basis as methodology develops. Our publicly available commentary provides more information on our approach to climate risk and the global energy transition.

The management of nature-related factors is increasingly a core component of some companies’ ability to generate sustainable, long-term financial returns for shareholders, particularly where a company’s strategy is heavily reliant on the availably of natural capital, or whose supply chains are exposed to locations with nature-related risks. We look for such companies to disclose³¹ how they consider their reliance and use of natural capital, including appropriate risk oversight and relevant metrics and targets, to understand how these factors are integrated into strategy. We will evaluate these disclosures to inform our view of how a company is managing material nature-related risks and opportunities, as well as in our assessment of relevant shareholder proposals. Our publicly available commentary provides more information on our approach to natural capital.

In order to deliver long-term value for shareholders, companies should also consider the interests of their key stakeholders. While stakeholder groups may vary across industries, they are likely to include employees; business partners (such as suppliers and distributors); clients and consumers; government and regulators; and

the constituents of the communities in which a company operates. Companies that build strong relationships with their key stakeholders are more likely to meet their own strategic objectives, while poor relationships may create adverse impacts that expose a company to legal, regulatory, operational, and reputational risks.

Companies should effectively oversee and mitigate material risks related to stakeholders with appropriate due diligence processes and board oversight. Where we determine that company is not appropriately considering their key stakeholder interests in a way that poses material financial risk to the company and its shareholders, we may vote against relevant directors or support shareholder proposals related to these topics. Our publicly available commentary provides more information on our approach.

Conversely, we note that some shareholder proposals seek to address topics that are clearly within the purview of certain stakeholders. For example, we recognize that topics around taxation and tax reporting are within the domain of local, state, and federal authorities. BIS will generally not support these proposals.

A company’s approach to human capital management (“HCM”) is a critical factor in fostering an inclusive, diverse, and engaged workforce, which contributes to business continuity, innovation, and long-term value creation. Consequently, we ask companies to demonstrate a robust approach to HCM and provide shareholders with disclosures to understand how their approach aligns with their stated strategy and business model.

Clear and consistent disclosures on these matters are critical for investors to make an informed assessment of a company’s HCM practices. Companies should disclose the steps they are taking to advance diversity, equity, and inclusion; job categories and workforce demographics; and their responses to the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission’s EEO-1 Survey. Where we believe a company’s disclosures or practices fall short relative to the market or peers, or we are unable to ascertain the board and management’s effectiveness in overseeing related risks and opportunities, we may vote against members of the appropriate committee or support relevant shareholder proposals. Our publicly available commentary provides more information on our approach to HCM.

Companies may engage in certain political activities, within legal and regulatory limits, in order to support public policy matters material to the companies’ long-term strategies. These activities can also create risks, including: the potential for allegations of corruption; certain reputational risks; and risks that arise from the complex legal, regulatory, and compliance considerations associated with corporate political spending and lobbying activity. Companies that engage in political activities should develop and maintain robust processes to guide these activities and mitigate risks, including board oversight.

We depend on companies to provide accessible and clear disclosures so that investors can easily understand how their political activities support their long-term strategy, including on stated public policy priorities. When presented with shareholder proposals requesting increased disclosure on corporate political activities, BIS will evaluate publicly available information to consider how a company’s lobbying and political activities may impact the company. We will also evaluate whether there is general consistency between a company’s stated positions on policy matters material to their strategy and the material positions taken by significant industry groups of which they are a member. We may decide to support a shareholder proposal requesting additional disclosures if we identify a material inconsistency or feel that further transparency may clarify how the company’s political activities support its long-term strategy. Our publicly available commentary provides more information on our approach to corporate political activities.

Boards should disclose how the corporate governance structures adopted upon a company’s initial public offering (“IPO”) are in shareholders’ best long-term interests. We also ask boards to conduct a regular review of corporate governance and control structures, such that boards might evolve foundational corporate governance structures as company circumstances change, without undue costs and disruption to shareholders. In our letter on unequal voting structures, we articulate our view that “one vote for one share” is the preferred structure for publicly-traded companies. We also recognize the potential benefits of dual class shares to newly public companies as they establish themselves; however, these structures should have a specific and limited duration. We will generally engage new companies on topics such as classified boards and supermajority vote provisions to amend bylaws, as we think that such arrangements may not be in the best interests of shareholders over the long-term.

We may apply a one-year grace period for the application of certain director-related guidelines (including, but not limited to, responsibilities on other public company boards and board composition concerns), during which we ask boards to take steps to bring corporate governance standards in line with our policies.

Further, if a company qualifies as an emerging growth company (an “EGC”) under the Jumpstart Our Business Startups Act of 2012 (the “JOBS Act”), we will give consideration to the NYSE and NASDAQ governance exemptions granted under the JOBS Act for the duration such a company is categorized as an EGC. An EGC should have an independent audit committee by the first anniversary of its IPO, with our standard approach to voting on auditors and audit-related issues applicable in full for an EGC on the first anniversary of its IPO.

Proposals to change a corporation’s form, including those to convert to a public benefit corporation (“PBC”) structure, should clearly articulate the stakeholder groups the company seeks to benefit and provide detail on how the interests of shareholders would be augmented or adversely affected with the change to a PBC. These disclosures should also include the accountability and voting mechanisms that would be available to shareholders. We generally support management proposals to convert to a PBC if our analysis indicates that shareholders’ interests are adequately protected. Corporate form shareholder proposals are evaluated on a case-by-case basis.

BIS generally supports proposals to seek exclusive forum for certain shareholder litigation. In cases where a board unilaterally adopts exclusive forum provisions that we consider unfavorable to the interests of shareholders, we will vote against the Independent Chair or Lead Independent director and members of the nominating/governance committee.

We will evaluate the economic and strategic rationale behind the company’s proposal to reincorporate on a case-by-case basis. In all instances, we will evaluate the changes to shareholder protections under the new charter/articles/bylaws to assess whether the move increases or decreases shareholder protections. Where we find that shareholder protections are diminished, we may support reincorporation if we determine that the overall benefits outweigh the diminished rights.

Where a company is listed on multiple exchanges or incorporated in a country different from their primary listing, we will seek to apply the most relevant market guideline(s) to our analysis of the company’s

governance structure and specific proposals on the shareholder meeting agenda. In doing so, we typically consider the governance standards of the company’s primary listing, the market standards by which the company governs themselves, and the market context of each specific proposal on the agenda. If the relevant standards are silent on the issue under consideration, we will use our professional judgment as to what voting outcome would best protect the long-term economic interests of investors. Companies should disclose the rationale for their selection of primary listing, country of incorporation, and choice of governance structures, particularly where there is conflict between relevant market governance practices.

We generally support such proposals unless the agenda contains items that we judge to be detrimental to shareholders’ best long-term economic interests.

Shareholders should have the opportunity to review substantial governance changes individually without having to accept bundled proposals. Where several measures are grouped into one proposal, BIS may reject certain positive changes when linked with proposals that generally contradict or impede the rights and economic interests of shareholders.

We oppose voting on matters where we are not given the opportunity to review and understand those measures and carry out an appropriate level of shareholder oversight.

Shareholders should have the right to vote on key corporate governance matters, including changes to governance mechanisms and amendments to the charter/articles/bylaws. We may vote against certain directors where changes to governing documents are not put to a shareholder vote within a reasonable period of time, particularly if those changes have the potential to impact shareholder rights (see “Director elections”). In cases where a board’s unilateral adoption of changes to the charter/articles/bylaws promotes cost and operational efficiency benefits for the company and its shareholders, we may support such action if it does not have a negative effect on shareholder rights or the company’s corporate governance structure.

When voting on a management or shareholder proposal to make changes to the charter/articles/bylaws, we will consider in part the company’s and/or proponent’s publicly stated rationale for the changes; the company’s governance profile and history; relevant jurisdictional laws; and situational or contextual circumstances which may have motivated the proposed changes, among other factors. We will typically support amendments to the charter/articles/bylaws where the benefits to shareholders outweigh the costs of failing to make such changes.

It is our view that long-term shareholders should have the opportunity, when necessary and under reasonable conditions, to nominate directors on the company’s proxy card.³² Securing the right of shareholders to nominate directors without engaging in a control contest can enhance shareholders’ ability to meaningfully participate in the director election process, encourage board attention to shareholder interests, and provide shareholders an effective means of directing that attention where it is lacking. Proxy access mechanisms should provide shareholders with a reasonable opportunity to use this right without stipulating

overly restrictive or onerous parameters for use, and also provide assurances that the mechanism will not be subject to abuse by short-term investors, investors without a substantial investment in the company, or investors seeking to take control of the board.

In general, we support market-standardized proxy access proposals, which allow a shareholder (or group of up to 20 shareholders) holding three percent of a company’s outstanding shares for at least three years the right to nominate the greater of up to two directors or 20% of the board. Where a standardized proxy access provision exists, we will generally oppose shareholder proposals requesting outlier thresholds.

In exceptional circumstances and with sufficiently broad support, shareholders should have the opportunity to raise issues of substantial importance without having to wait for management to schedule a meeting. Accordingly, shareholders should have the right to solicit votes by written consent provided that: 1) there are reasonable requirements to initiate the consent solicitation process(in order to avoid the waste of corporate resources in addressing narrowly supported interests); and 2) shareholders receive a minimum of 50% of outstanding shares to effectuate the action by written consent.

We may oppose shareholder proposals requesting the right to act by written consent in cases where the proposal is structured for the benefit of a dominant shareholder to the exclusion of others, or if the proposal is written to discourage the board from incorporating appropriate mechanisms to avoid the waste of corporate resources when establishing a right to act by written consent. Additionally, we may oppose shareholder proposals requesting the right to act by written consent if the company already provides a shareholder right to call a special meeting that offers shareholders a reasonable opportunity to raise issues of substantial importance without having to wait for management to schedule a meeting.

In exceptional circumstances and with sufficiently broad support, shareholders should have the opportunity to raise issues of substantial importance without having to wait for management to schedule a meeting. Accordingly, shareholders should have the right to call a special meeting in cases where a reasonably high proportion of shareholders (typically a minimum of 15% but no higher than 25%) are required to agree to such a meeting before it is called. However, we may oppose this right in cases where the proposal is structured for the benefit of a dominant shareholder, or where a lower threshold may lead to an ineffective use of corporate resources. We generally think that a right to act via written consent is not a sufficient alternative to the right to call a special meeting.

While BlackRock is supportive of the shareholder rights to act by written consent and call a special meeting, BlackRock is subject to certain regulations and laws that place restrictions and limitations on how BlackRock can interact with the companies in which we invest on behalf of our clients, including our ability to participate in consent solicitations. As a result, BlackRock will generally not participate in consent solicitations or related processes. However, once an item comes to a shareholder vote, we uphold our fiduciary duty to vote in the best long-term interests of our clients, where we are authorized to do so.

We generally favor a simple majority voting requirement to pass proposals. Therefore, we will generally support the reduction or the elimination of supermajority voting requirements to the extent that we determine shareholders’ ability to protect their economic interests is improved. Nonetheless, in situations where there is a substantial or dominant shareholder, supermajority voting may be protective of minority shareholder interests, and we may support supermajority voting requirements in those situations.

Shareholders should have the opportunity to participate in the annual and special meetings for the companies in which they are invested, as these meetings facilitate an opportunity for shareholders to provide feedback and hear from the board and management. While these meetings have traditionally been conducted in-person, virtual meetings are an increasingly viable way for companies to utilize technology to facilitate shareholder accessibility, inclusiveness, and cost efficiencies. Shareholders should have a meaningful opportunity to participate in the meeting and interact with the board and management in these virtual settings; companies should facilitate open dialogue and allow shareholders to voice concerns and provide feedback without undue censorship. Relevant shareholder proposals are assessed on a case-by-case basis.


Fund and Share Class		Ticker Symbol
BLACKROCK CASH FUNDS: INSTITUTIONAL — SL Agency Shares		BISXX
BLACKROCK CASH FUNDS: TREASURY — SL Agency Shares		XTSLA


	Page

Back-Up Withholding		64

Tax-Deferred Plans		64

Foreign Shareholders		64

Foreign Account Tax Compliance		65

Capital Stock		65

Voting		65

Dividends and Distributions		66

Master Portfolios		66

Additional Information on the Funds		66

Financial Statements		67

Appendix A		A-1


	Time Periods for Portfolio Holdings
	Prior to 20 Calendar Days After Month-End	20 Calendar Days After Month-End To Public Filing
Portfolio Holdings	Cannot disclose without non-disclosure or confidentiality agreement and Chief Compliance Officer (“CCO”) approval.	May disclose to shareholders, prospective shareholders, intermediaries, consultants and third-party data providers (e.g., Lipper, Morningstar and Bloomberg), except with respect to Global Allocation funds* (whose portfolio holdings may be disclosed 40 calendar days after quarter-end based on the applicable fund’s fiscal year end) and BlackRock Core Bond Portfolio and BlackRock Strategic Income Opportunities Portfolio of BlackRock Funds V, BlackRock Strategic Global Bond Fund, Inc., Master Total Return Portfolio of Master Bond LLC, BlackRock Total Return V.I. Fund of BlackRock Variable Series Funds II, Inc., BlackRock Sustainable Total Return Fund of BlackRock Bond Fund, Inc. and BlackRock Unconstrained Equity Fund (each of whose portfolio holdings may be disclosed 60 calendar days after month-end). If Portfolio Holdings are disclosed to one party, they must also be disclosed to all other parties requesting the same information.
	Time Periods for Portfolio Characteristics
Portfolio Characteristics (Excluding Liquidity Metrics)	Prior to 5 Calendar Days After Month-End	5 Calendar Days After Month-End
Portfolio Characteristics (Excluding Liquidity Metrics)	Cannot disclose without non-disclosure or confidentiality agreement and CCO approval., *	May disclose to shareholders, prospective shareholders, intermediaries, consultants and third-party data providers (e.g., Lipper, Morningstar and Bloomberg). If Portfolio Characteristics are disclosed to one party, they must also be disclosed to all other parties requesting the same information.
Portfolio Characteristics — Liquidity Metrics	Prior to 60 Calendar Days After Calendar Quarter-End	60 Calendar Days After Calendar Quarter-End
Portfolio Characteristics — Liquidity Metrics	Cannot disclose without non-disclosure or confidentiality agreement and CCO approval.	May disclose to shareholders, prospective shareholders, intermediaries and consultants; provided portfolio management has approved. If Liquidity Metrics are disclosed to one party, they must also be disclosed to all other parties requesting the same information.


	Time Periods
	Prior to 5 Calendar Days After Month-End	5 Calendar Days After Month-End to Date of Public Filing
Portfolio Holdings	Cannot disclose without non-disclosure or confidentiality agreement and CCO approval except the following portfolio holdings information may be released as follows: • Weekly portfolio holdings information released on the website at least one business day after week-end except: ○ Other information as may be required under Rule 2a-7 (e.g., name of issuer, category of investment, principal amount, maturity dates, yields). ○ For Government money market funds, daily portfolio holdings are released on the website the following business day.	May disclose to shareholders, prospective shareholders, intermediaries, consultants and third-party data providers. If portfolio holdings are disclosed to one party, they must also be disclosed to all other parties requesting the same information.
Portfolio Characteristics	Cannot disclose without non-disclosure or confidentiality agreement and CCO approval except the following information may be released on the Fund’s website daily: • Historical net asset values (“NAVs”) calculated based on market factors (e.g., marked-to-market). • Percentage of Fund assets invested in daily and weekly liquid assets (as defined under Rule 2a-7). • Daily net inflows and outflows • Yields, SEC yields, WAM, WAL, current assets. • Other information as may be required by Rule 2a-7.	May disclose to shareholders, prospective shareholders, intermediaries, consultants and third-party data providers. If Portfolio Characteristics are disclosed to one party, they must also be disclosed to all other parties requesting the same information.
* BlackRock Short Obligation. Fund’s holdings may be disclosed in accordance with the frequency for money market funds. ** Circle Reserve Fund Exception: Information on portfolio holdings and certain portfolio characteristics of the Circle Reserve Fund may be made available to the sole shareholder of the Fund, upon request, on a more frequent basis as may be deemed appropriate by BlackRock from time-to-time.


Trustees		Experience, Qualifications and Skills

Henry R. Keizer		Henry R. Keizer brings over 40 years of executive, financial, operational, strategic and global expertise gained through his 35 year career at KPMG, a global professional services organization and by his service as a director to both publicly and privately held organizations. He has extensive experience with issues facing complex, global companies and expertise in financial reporting, accounting, auditing, risk management, and regulatory affairs for such companies. Mr. Keizer’s experience also includes service as an audit committee chair to both publicly and privately held organizations across numerous industries including professional services, property and casualty reinsurance, insurance, diversified financial services, banking, direct to consumer, business to business and technology. Mr. Keizer is a certified public accountant and also served on the board of the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants. Mr. Keizer has been determined by the Audit Committee to be an audit committee financial expert, as such term is defined in the applicable Commission rules.

Cynthia A. Montgomery		Cynthia A. Montgomery has served for over 20 years on the boards of registered investment companies, most recently as a member of the boards of certain BlackRock-advised Funds and predecessor funds, including the legacy Merrill Lynch Investment Managers, L.P. (“MLIM”) funds. The Board benefits from Ms. Montgomery’s more than 20 years of academic experience as a professor at Harvard Business School where she taught courses on corporate strategy and corporate governance. Ms. Montgomery also has business management and corporate governance experience through her service on the corporate boards of a variety of public companies. She has also authored numerous articles and books on these topics.

Donald C. Opatrny		Donald C. Opatrny has more than 40 years of business, oversight and executive experience, including through his service as president, director and investment committee chair for academic and not-for-profit organizations, and his experience as a partner, managing director and advisory director at Goldman Sachs for 32 years. He also has investment management experience as a board member of Athena Capital Advisors LLC.

Mark Stalnecker		Mark Stalnecker has gained a wealth of experience in investing and asset management from his over 13 years of service as the Chief Investment Officer of the University of Delaware as well as from his various positions with First Union Corporation, including Senior Vice President and State Investment Director of First Investment Advisors. The Board benefits from his experience and perspective as the Chief Investment Officer of a university endowment and from the oversight experience he gained from service on various private and non-profit boards.

Kenneth L. Urish		Kenneth L. Urish has served for over 15 years on the boards of registered investment companies, most recently as a member of the boards of certain BlackRock-advised Funds and predecessor funds, including the legacy BlackRock funds. He has over 30 years of experience in public accounting. Mr. Urish has served as a managing member of an accounting and consulting firm. Mr. Urish has been determined by the Audit Committee to be an audit committee financial expert, as such term is defined in the applicable Commission rules.

Claire A. Walton		Claire A. Walton has over 25 years of experience in investment management. She served as the Chief Operating Officer and Chief Financial Officer of Liberty Square Asset Management, LP from 1998 to 2015, an investment manager that specialized in long/short non-U.S. equity investments, and has been an owner and General Partner of Neon Liberty Capital Management, LLC since 2003, a firm focusing on long/short equities in global emerging and frontier markets. These positions have provided her with insight and perspective on the markets and the economy.

Interested Trustees

Robert Fairbairn		Robert Fairbairn has more than 25 years of experience with BlackRock, Inc. and over 30 years of experience in finance and asset management. In particular, Mr. Fairbairn’s positions as Vice Chairman of BlackRock, Inc., Member of BlackRock’s Global Executive and Global Operating Committees and Co-Chair of BlackRock’s Human Capital Committee provide the Board with a wealth of practical business knowledge and leadership. In addition, Mr. Fairbairn has global investment management and oversight experience through his former positions as Global Head of BlackRock’s Retail and iShares^® businesses, Head of BlackRock’s Global Client Group, Chairman of BlackRock’s international businesses and his previous oversight over BlackRock’s Strategic Partner Program and Strategic Product Management Group. Mr. Fairbairn also serves as a board member for the funds in the BlackRock Fixed-Income Complex.

John M. Perlowski		John M. Perlowski’s experience as Managing Director of BlackRock, Inc. since 2009, as the Head of BlackRock Global Accounting and Product Services since 2009, and as President and Chief Executive Officer of the BlackRock-advised Funds provides him with a strong understanding of the BlackRock-advised Funds, their operations, and the business and regulatory issues facing the BlackRock-advised Funds. Mr. Perlowski’s prior position as Managing Director and Chief Operating Officer of the Global Product Group at Goldman Sachs Asset Management, and his former service as Treasurer and Senior Vice President of the Goldman Sachs Mutual Funds and as Director of the Goldman Sachs Offshore Funds provides the Board with the benefit of his experience with the management practices of other financial companies. Mr. Perlowski also serves as a board member for the funds in the BlackRock Fixed-Income Complex.


	Page

History of the Trust		2

Description of the Funds and their Investments and Risks		2

Investment Objectives and Policies		2

Master/Feeder Structure		2

Investment Restrictions		3

Fundamental Investment Restrictions of the Funds		3

Non-Fundamental Investment Restrictions of the Funds		4

Investments and Risks		5

Asset-Backed and Commercial Mortgage-Backed Securities		6

Bank Obligations		6

Commercial Paper and Short-Term Corporate Debt Instruments		7

Asset-Backed Commercial Paper		7

Floating-Rate and Variable-Rate Obligations		8

Forward Commitments, When-Issued Purchases and Delayed-Delivery Transactions		9

Funding Agreements		9

Illiquid Securities		10

Interfund Lending Program		10

Investment Company Securities		11

Letters of Credit		11

Loan Participation Agreements		12

Medium-Term Notes		12

Mortgage Pass-Through Securities		12

Mortgage Securities		14

Municipal Securities		14

Non-U.S. Obligations		15

Participation Interests		15

Regulation Regarding Derivatives		15

Repurchase Agreements		16

Restricted Securities		17

Securities Lending		17

Unrated Investments		18

U.S. Government Obligations		18

U.S. Treasury Obligations		18

Disclosure of Portfolio Holdings		18

Management		24

Share Ownership Information		32


	Page

Ownership of Securities of Certain Entities		32

Compensation of Trustees		33

Codes of Ethics		33

Proxy Voting Policies of the Master Portfolios		33

Shareholder Communication to the Board of Trustees		34

Potential Conflicts of Interest		34

Control Persons and Principal Holders of Securities		42

Investment Adviser and Other Service Providers		44

Investment Adviser		44

Advisory Fees		44

Administrator		45

Distributor		46

Other Payments by the Fund		46

Additional Payments by BlackRock		46

Custodian		51

Transfer and Dividend Disbursing Agent		51

Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm		52

Determination of Net Asset Value		52

Purchase, Redemption and Pricing of Shares		55

Terms of Purchase and Redemption		55

In-Kind Purchases		56

Suspension of Redemption Rights or Payment of Redemption Proceeds		56

Declaration of Trust Provisions Regarding Redemptions at Option of Trust		56

Portfolio Transactions		56

General		57

Portfolio Turnover		58

Securities of Regular Broker-Dealers		58

Distributions and Taxes		58

Qualification as a Regulated Investment Company		59

Excise Tax		60

Capital Loss Carry-Forwards		60

Investment Through the Master Portfolios		61

Taxation of Fund Investments		61

Taxation of Distributions		62

Sales of Fund Shares		63

Foreign Taxes		63

Federal Income Tax Rates		64


Fund		Master Portfolio in Which the Fund Invests
BlackRock Cash Funds: Institutional		Money Market Master Portfolio

BlackRock Cash Funds: Treasury		Treasury Money Market Master Portfolio


Trustees		Experience, Qualifications and Skills

Independent Trustees

Susan J. Carter		Susan J. Carter has over 35 years of experience in investment management. She has served as President & Chief Executive Officer of Commonfund Capital, Inc. (“CCI”), a registered investment adviser focused on non-profit investors, from 1997 to 2013, Chief Executive Officer of CCI from 2013 to 2014 and Senior Advisor to CCI in 2015. Ms. Carter also served as trustee to the Pacific Pension Institute from 2014 to 2018. She currently serves as trustee to the Financial Accounting Foundation, Advisory Board Member for the Center for Private Equity and Entrepreneurship at Tuck School of Business, Advisory Board Member for Bridges Fund Management, Member of the President’s Counsel, Common Fund and Practitioner Advisory Board Member for Private Capital Research Institute (“PCRI”). These positions have provided her with insight and perspective on the markets and the economy.

Collette Chilton		Collette Chilton has over 20 years of experience in investment management. She has held the position of Chief Investment Officer of Williams College since October 2006. Prior to that she was President and Chief Investment Officer of Lucent Asset Management Corporation, where she oversaw approximately $40 billion in pension and retirement savings assets for the company. These positions have provided her with insight and perspective on the markets and the economy.

Neil A. Cotty		Neil A. Cotty has more than 30 years of experience in the financial services industry, including 19 years at Bank of America Corporation and its affiliates, where he served, at different times, as the Chief Financial Officer of various businesses including Investment Banking, Global Markets, Wealth Management and Consumer and also served ten years as the Chief Accounting Officer for Bank of America Corporation. Mr. Cotty has been determined by the Audit Committee to be an audit committee financial expert, as such term is defined in the applicable Commission rules.

Lena G. Goldberg		Lena G. Goldberg has more than 20 years of business and oversight experience, most recently through her service as a senior lecturer at Harvard Business School. Prior thereto, she held legal and management positions at FMR LLC/Fidelity Investments as well as positions on the boards of various Fidelity subsidiaries over a 12-year period. She has additional corporate governance experience as a member of board and advisory committees for privately held corporations and non-profit organizations. Ms. Goldberg also has more than 17 years of legal experience as an attorney in private practice, including as a partner in a law firm.


Name and Year of Birth^1,2	Position(s) Held (Length of Service)³	Principal Occupation(s) During Past Five Years	Number of BlackRock- Advised Registered Investment Companies (“RICs”) Consisting of Investment Portfolios (“Portfolios”) Overseen	Public Company and Other Investment Company Directorships Held During Past Five Years

Independent Trustees

Mark Stalnecker 1951	Chair of the Board (Since 2019) and Trustee (Since 2015)	Chief Investment Officer, University of Delaware from 1999 to 2013; Trustee and Chair of the Finance and Investment Committees, Winterthur Museum and Country Estate from 2005 to 2016; Member of the Investment Committee, Delaware Public Employees’ Retirement System since 2002; Member of the Investment Committee, Christiana Care Health System from 2009 to 2017; Member of the Investment Committee, Delaware Community Foundation from 2013 to 2014; Director and Chair of the Audit Committee, SEI Private Trust Co. from 2001 to 2014.	28 RICs consisting of 166 Portfolios	None

Susan J. Carter 1956	Trustee (Since 2016)	Trustee, Financial Accounting Foundation from 2017 to 2021; Advisory Board Member, Center for Private Equity and Entrepreneurship at Tuck School of Business from 1997 to 2021; Director, Pacific Pension Institute from 2014 to 2018; Senior Advisor, CCI (investment adviser) in 2015; Chief Executive Officer, CCI from 2013 to 2014; President & Chief Executive Officer, CCI from 1997 to 2013; Advisory Board Member, Girls Who Invest from 2015 to 2018 and Board Member thereof from 2018 to 2022; Advisory Board Member, Bridges Fund Management since 2016; Practitioner Advisory Board Member, PCRI since 2017; Lecturer in the Practice of Management, Yale School of Management since 2019; Advisor to Finance Committee, Altman Foundation since 2020; Investment Committee Member, Tostan since 2021; Member of the President’s Counsel, Commonfund since 2023.	28 RICs consisting of 166 Portfolios	None

Collette Chilton 1958	Trustee (Since 2015)	Chief Investment Officer, Williams College since 2006; Chief Investment Officer, Lucent Asset Management Corporation from 1998 to 2006; Director, Boys and Girls Club of Boston since 2017; Director, B1 Capital since 2018; Director, David and Lucile Packard Foundation since 2020.	28 RICs consisting of 166 Portfolios	None

Neil A. Cotty 1954	Trustee (Since 2016)	Director, Pioneer Legal Institute since 2023; Bank of America Corporation from 1996 to 2015, serving in various senior finance leadership roles, including Chief Accounting Officer from 2009 to 2015, Chief Financial Officer of Global Banking, Markets and Wealth Management from 2008 to 2009, Chief Accounting Officer from 2004 to 2008, Chief Financial Officer of Consumer Bank from 2003 to 2004, Chief Financial Officer of Global Corporate Investment Bank from 1999 to 2002.	28 RICs consisting of 166 Portfolios	None

Lena G. Goldberg 1949	Trustee (Since 2019)	Director, Pioneer Legal Institute since 2023; Director, Charles Stark Draper Laboratory, Inc. from 2013 to 2021; Senior Lecturer, Harvard Business School from 2008 to 2021; FMR LLC/Fidelity Investments (financial services) from 1996 to 2008, serving in various senior roles including Executive Vice President – Strategic Corporate Initiatives and Executive Vice President and General Counsel; Partner, Sullivan & Worcester LLP from 1985 to 1996 and Associate thereof from 1979 to 1985.	28 RICs consisting of 166 Portfolios	None


Name and Year of Birth^1,2	Position(s) Held (Length of Service)	Principal Occupation(s) During Past Five Years

Officers Who Are Not Trustees

Roland Villacorta 1971	Vice President (Since 2022)	Managing Director of BlackRock, Inc. since 2022; Head of Global Cash Management and Head of Securities Lending within BlackRock’s Portfolio Management Group since 2022; Member of BlackRock’s Global Operating Committee since 2022; Head of Portfolio Management in BlackRock’s Financial Markets Advisory Group within BlackRock Solutions from 2008 to 2015; Co-Head of BlackRock Solutions’ Portfolio Analytics Group; previously Mr. Villacorta was Co-Head of Fixed Income within BlackRock’s Risk & Quantitative Analysis Group.

Jennifer McGovern 1977	Vice President (Since 2014)	Managing Director of BlackRock, Inc. since 2016; Director of BlackRock, Inc. from 2011 to 2015; Head of Americas Product Development and Governance for BlackRock’s Global Product Group since 2019; Head of Product Structure and Oversight for BlackRock’s U.S. Wealth Advisory Group from 2013 to 2019.

Trent Walker 1974	Chief Financial Officer (Since 2021)	Managing Director of BlackRock, Inc. since September 2019; Executive Vice President of PIMCO from 2016 to 2019; Senior Vice President of PIMCO from 2008 to 2015; Treasurer from 2013 to 2019 and Assistant Treasurer from 2007 to 2017 of PIMCO Funds, PIMCO Variable Insurance Trust, PIMCO ETF Trust, PIMCO Equity Series, PIMCO Equity Series VIT, PIMCO Managed Accounts Trust, 2 PIMCO-sponsored interval funds and 21 PIMCO-sponsored closed-end funds.


Name	Dollar Range of Equity Securities in BlackRock Cash Funds: Institutional	Dollar Range of Equity Securities in BlackRock Cash Funds: Treasury	Aggregate Dollar Range of Equity Securities in Supervised Funds

Independent Trustees:

Susan J. Carter	None	None	Over $100,000

Collette Chilton	None	None	Over $100,000

Neil A. Cotty	None	None	Over $100,000

Lena G. Goldberg	None	None	Over $100,000

Henry R. Keizer	None	None	Over $100,000

Cynthia A. Montgomery	None	None	Over $100,000

Donald C. Opatrny	None	None	Over $100,000

Mark Stalnecker	None	None	Over $100,000

Kenneth L. Urish	None	None	Over $100,000

Claire A. Walton	None	None	Over $100,000

Interested Trustees:

Robert Fairbairn	None	None	Over $100,000

John M. Perlowski	None	None	Over $100,000


Name	Compensation from Money Market Master Portfolio	Compensation from Treasury Money Market Master Portfolio	Estimated Annual Benefits upon Retirement	Aggregate Compensation from the Master Portfolio and Other BlackRock- Advised Funds¹

Independent Trustees:

Susan J. Carter	$21,500	$12,447	None	$400,000

Collette Chilton	$21,500	$12,447	None	$400,000

Neil A. Cotty	$21,500	$12,447	None	$400,000

Lena G. Goldberg²	$24,630	$14,219	None	$445,000

Henry R. Keizer³	$24,630	$14,219	None	$445,000

Cynthia A. Montgomery⁴	$24,630	$14,219	None	$445,000

Donald C. Opatrny⁵	$24,630	$14,219	None	$445,000

Joseph P. Platt⁶	$21,500	$12,447	None	$400,000

Mark Stalnecker⁷	$31,933	$18,354	None	$550,000

Kenneth L. Urish	$21,500	$12,447	None	$400,000

Claire A. Walton	$21,500	$12,447	None	$400,000

Interested Trustees:

Robert Fairbairn	None	None	None	None

John M. Perlowski	None	None	None	None


Name of Share Class	Name and Address of Shareholder	Percentage of Share Class

SL Agency Shares	ISHARES RUSSELL 2000 ETF C/O BLACKROCK INSTITUTIONAL TRUST COMPANY 400 HOWARD STREET, FOUNDRY SQUARE I San Francisco, CA 94105	8.91%

	ISHARES CORE S&P MID-CAP ETF C/O BLACKROCK INSTITUTIONAL TRUST COMPANY 400 HOWARD STREET, FOUNDRY SQUARE I San Francisco, CA 94105	5.83%

	ISHARES CORE S&P SMALL-CAP ETF C/O BLACKROCK INSTITUTIONAL TRUST COMPANY 400 HOWARD STREET, FOUNDRY SQUARE I San Francisco, CA 94105	5.70%

	INVESTORS BANK AND TRUST AS CUSTODIAN FBO ISHARES LEHMAN AGGREGATE BOND FUND 200 CLARENDON STREET Boston, MA 02116	5.22%


	Fiscal Year Ended December 31,
Master Portfolio	2020		2021		2022

Money Market Master Portfolio	$	39,741,005	$	46,179,769	$	46,673,859

Treasury Money Market Master Portfolio	$	10,712,864	$	12,423,446	$	13,191,352


For the Fiscal Year Ended December 31,	Money Market Master Portfolio		Treasury Money Market Master Portfolio

2022	$	1,294,584	$	377,599

2021	$	1,084,971	$	364,540

2020	$	999,469	$	330,612


Master Portfolio	Regular Broker-Dealer or Parent	Debt (D)/Equity (E)	Amount (000s)

Treasury Money Market Master Portfolio	BONY Fed Tri Party Repo	D	$10,900,000

Treasury Money Market Master Portfolio	Barclays/bzm Tri Party Repo	D	$1,000,000

Treasury Money Market Master Portfolio	Citigroup Holdings Inc	D	$992,000

Treasury Money Market Master Portfolio	Tri Party Natixis S.A	D	$105,000

Money Market Master Portfolio	BONY Fed Tri Party Repo	D	$20,950,000

Money Market Master Portfolio	Barclays Bank Plc	D	$2,678,609

Money Market Master Portfolio	JP Morgan Securities	D	$2,038,900

Money Market Master Portfolio	Citigroup Global Markets	D	$818,755

Money Market Master Portfolio	Credit Agricole	D	$625,297

Money Market Master Portfolio	Skandin ENS Banken AG	D	$372,508

Money Market Master Portfolio	BNP Paribas	D	$304,000

Money Market Master Portfolio	Sweadbank AB IAM Coml Paper	D	$246,160

Money Market Master Portfolio	Nordea BK AB Publ NY	D	$225,121

Money Market Master Portfolio	Bank of America N.A	D	$180,579


Introduction to BlackRock			A-4

Philosophy on investment stewardship			A-4

Key themes			A-5

Boards and directors			A-5

Auditors and audit-related issues			A-8

Capital structure, mergers, asset sales, and other special transactions			A-9

Compensation and benefits			A-10

Material sustainability-related risks and opportunities			A-11

Other corporate governance matters and shareholder protections			A-13

Shareholder proposals			A-14

BlackRock’s oversight of its investment stewardship activities			A-14

Vote execution			A-15

Conflicts management policies and procedures			A-16

Securities lending			A-17

Voting guidelines			A-17

Reporting and vote transparency			A-18


Introduction		A-21

Voting guidelines		A-21

Boards and directors		A-21

Board Structure		A-23

Board composition and effectiveness		A-25

Board responsiveness and shareholder rights		A-26

Auditors and audit-related issues		A-28

Capital structure proposals		A-28

Mergers, acquisitions, transactions, and other special situations		A-29

Executive Compensation		A-30

Material sustainability-related risks and opportunities		A-33

General corporate governance matters		A-37

Shareholder protections		A-38


	Public Company Executive¹⁴	# Outside Public Boards¹⁵		Total # of Public Boards
Director A	✓		1		2
Director B			3		4


	Combined Chair/CEO or CEO + Non-independent Chair		Separate Independent Chair
	Chair/CEO or Non-independent Chair	Lead Independent Director	Independent Chair
	Authority to call full meetings of the board of directors	Attends full meetings of the board of directors	Authority to call full meetings of the board of directors

Board Meetings		Authority to call meetings of independent directors

		Briefs CEO on issues arising from executive sessions

Agenda	Primary responsibility for shaping board agendas, consulting with the lead independent director	Collaborates with chair/CEO to set board agenda and board information	Primary responsibility for shaping board agendas, in conjunction with CEO

Board Communications	Communicates with all directors on key issues and concerns outside of full board meetings	Facilitates discussion among independent directors on key issues and concerns outside of full board meetings, including contributing to the oversight of CEO and management succession planning	Facilitates discussion among independent directors on key issues and concerns outside of full board meetings, including contributing to the oversight of CEO and management succession planning