UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549
FORM N-CSRS
CERTIFIED SHAREHOLDER REPORT OF REGISTERED MANAGEMENT
INVESTMENT COMPANIES
Investment Company Act file number 811-2668
Oppenheimer Rochester AMT-Free Municipal Fund
(Exact name of registrant as specified in charter)
6803 South Tucson Way, Centennial, Colorado 80112-3924
(Address of principal executive offices) (Zip code)
Cynthia Lo Bessette
OFI Global Asset Management, Inc.
225 Liberty Street, New York, New York 10281-1008
(Name and address of agent for service)
Registrant’s telephone number, including area code: (303) 768-3200
Date of fiscal year end: July 31
Date of reporting period: 1/29/2016
Item 1. Reports to Stockholders.
Semiannual Report
| 1/31/2016
| |||||
|
Oppenheimer
Rochester®
AMT-Free
Municipal Fund
Class A Shares
AVERAGE ANNUAL TOTAL RETURNS AT 1/29/16*
Class A Shares of the Fund | ||||||
Without Sales Charge | With Sales Charge |
Barclays Municipal | ||||
6-Month | 5.81 % | 0.79 % | 3.66 % | |||
| ||||||
1-Year | 3.85 | -1.09 | 2.71 | |||
| ||||||
5-Year | 10.30 | 9.24 | 5.75 | |||
| ||||||
10-Year | 2.54 | 2.05 | 4.81 | |||
|
Performance data quoted represents past performance, which does not guarantee future results. The investment return and principal value of an investment in the Fund will fluctuate so that an investor’s shares, when redeemed, may be worth more or less than their original cost. Fund returns include changes in share price, reinvested distributions, and a 4.75% maximum applicable sales charge except where “without sales charge” is indicated. Current performance may be lower or higher than the performance quoted. Returns for periods of less than one year are not annualized. Returns do not consider capital gains or income taxes on an individual’s investment. For performance data current to the most recent month-end, visit oppenheimerfunds.com or call 1.800.CALL OPP (225.5677).
Our Twitter handle is @RochesterFunds.
*January 29, 2016 was the last business day of the Fund’s reporting period. See Note 2 of the accompanying Notes to Financial Statements. Index returns are calculated through January 31, 2016.
2 OPPENHEIMER ROCHESTER AMT-FREE MUNICIPAL FUND
An Important Update
to the Fund Performance Discussion
Update (as of March 14, 2016): In the weeks that followed the end of this reporting period, several developments occurred that we believe warrant attention from this Fund’s shareholders:
On February 1, 2016, Puerto Rico made its debt-service payments on securities issued by the Puerto Rico Sales Tax Financing Corporation. The payment for these bonds, which are known as COFINAs, was 99% funded at the end of December and totaled approximately $322 million. The COFINAs are backed by the sales and use tax. The Municipal Finance Authority (MFA) also made its payments on February 1. As expected, the Puerto Rico Finance Corporation (PFC) defaulted on its February 1, 2016 payments.
Also on February 1, Puerto Rico proposed a voluntary “bond exchange” that it said would reduce its debt burden to $26.5 billion, from $49.2 billion. Under the proposal, creditors would exchange existing bonds for “base bonds” and “growth bonds.” Interest payments on the former would not begin until 2018, and payments on the latter would start a decade after the close of the exchange offer—but only if certain revenue levels have been achieved. Many market participants were critical of this proposal’s viability.
Officials from Puerto Rico appeared at a February 2, 2016 hearing of the U.S. House Natural Resources Committee’s Subcommittee on Indian, Insular, and Alaska Native Affairs. The hearing included lengthy discussions about the benefits of establishing a federal control board to help the Commonwealth remedy its fiscal woes. Oppenheimer Rochester continues to believe that such a board would prove beneficial to the government and its authorities, to bondholders and to the people of Puerto Rico. Subcommittee members continued to press for audited financials from the Commonwealth.
Also in early February, the U.S. Supreme Court announced that it would hear arguments related to the validity of the Puerto Rico Public Corporation Debt and Recovery Act (“the Recovery Act”) on March 22.
On February 10, 2016, Sen. Orrin Hatch, chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, sent Gov. Alejandro Garcia Padilla a long list of questions and asked for a response by March 1. During a press conference on March 2, the governor said that his office was still working on its response, noting “I do not accept ultimatums from anyone.”
3 OPPENHEIMER ROCHESTER AMT-FREE MUNICIPAL FUND
On February 16, 2016, Governor Padilla signed legislation related to the December 2015 debt-restructuring agreement between PREPA, the Commonwealth’s electric utility authority, and its forbearing bondholders. The deadline for submitting a rate proposal to the Commonwealth’s Energy Commission was extended to April 22, from March 1.
Also on February 16, Puerto Rico released draft financials for fiscal year 2014. Later in the month, the governor said he expected that year’s audited financials to be ready April 1. In his State of the Commonwealth speech on February 29, the governor chided those who have insisted on seeing the audited financials before agreeing to help Puerto Rico.
On February 24, 2016, OppenheimerFunds, Franklin Advisers and the First Puerto Rico Family of Funds sent a letter to the chairman of the Puerto Rico House Committee on Finance and Budget, Rafael “Tatito” Hernández Montañez, and Puerto Rico’s legislators. The letter addressed the rhetoric coming from the Commonwealth about plans to weaken the COFINA bond structure and protections. Details about the letter can be found at www.oppenheimerfunds.com/puerto_rico.
The next day, two more hearings were held at the U.S. House on developments in Puerto Rico.
In early March, The Bond Buyer reported that PRASA, the Commonwealth’s aqueduct and sewer authority, had created a contingency plan to use if it cannot access the credit markets. On March 10, the Puerto Rico House passed legislation that would allow PRASA to issue new debt and avoid a rate hike; the Puerto Rico Senate has yet to vote on the legislation, which includes several prerequisites.
On March 8, 2016, the governor agreed to postpone until June 1 a 6.5 percentage point increase in the Commonwealth’s business-to-business service tax. This decision is expected to delay Puerto Rico’s transition to a value-added tax, originally slated to begin April 1. Meanwhile, there are calls for the Commonwealth’s tax system to be overhauled.
Our team continues to be an active participant in negotiations with Puerto Rico officials. Shareholders should be confident that we will continue to work to protect our shareholders’ best interests.
4 OPPENHEIMER ROCHESTER AMT-FREE MUNICIPAL FUND
Amid low interest rates during the 6-month reporting period that ended January 29, 2016, the last business day of this reporting period, Oppenheimer Rochester AMT-Free Municipal Fund provided a total return at net asset value (NAV) of 5.81% and generated high levels of tax-free income. The Fund’s Class A shares provided a distribution yield of 5.89% at NAV at the end of this reporting period. At the end of January 2016, the Fund’s Class A shares were ranked second, behind this Fund’s Class Y shares, in Lipper’s General & Insured Municipal Debt Funds category for 12-month distribution yield, a calculation that compares fund yields for the trailing 12 months. The Fund also outperformed the Barclays Municipal Bond Index, its benchmark, by 215 basis points.
MARKET OVERVIEW
The Fed Funds target rate, the short-term interest rate set by the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC), was increased to the range of 0.25% to 0.50% on December 16, 2015, seven years to the day after it had been reduced to the range of zero to 0.25%. The last increase – to 5.25% – was announced June 29, 2006. Despite ongoing concerns about low inflation due to decreasing oil prices and low import prices, the Fed cited steady job growth and a near-normal unemployment rate of 5% as reasons for the increase. In a statement following the December meeting, Fed officials said they expect the economy to
The average 12-month distribution yield in Lipper’s General & Insured Municipal Debt Funds category was 3.09% at the end of this reporting period. At 5.89%, the 12-month distribution yield at NAV for this Fund’s Class A shares was 280 basis points higher than the category average.
|
warrant only “gradual increases” over the next few years, projecting that interest rates would rise one percentage point per year.
YIELDS & DISTRIBUTIONS FOR CLASS A SHARES | ||||
| ||||
Dividend Yield w/o sales charge | 5.89% | |||
| ||||
Dividend Yield with sales charge | 5.60 | |||
| ||||
Standardized Yield | 4.51 | |||
| ||||
Taxable Equivalent Yield | 7.97 | |||
| ||||
Last distribution (1/26/16) | $ | 0.034 | ||
| ||||
Total distributions (8/1/15 to 1/31/16) | $ | 0.209 | ||
| ||||
Endnotes for this discussion begin on page 17 of this report |
5 OPPENHEIMER ROCHESTER AMT-FREE MUNICIPAL FUND
Many market watchers had predicted the FOMC would raise the Fed Funds target rate at the September 2015 meeting, but the Fed decided otherwise. Citing “underutilization of labor resources and inflation continuing to run below the committee’s longer-run objective,” the Committee voted to keep the short-term rate at zero to 0.25%.
In a speech after the September meeting, Chairman Janet Yellen tried to quell the resulting market volatility saying, “It will likely be appropriate to raise the target range of the Federal Funds rate sometime later this year, and to continue boosting short-term rates at a gradual pace thereafter as the labor market improves further and inflation moves back to our 2% objective.”
While not definitive by any measure, the statement was more specific than earlier announcements from the Fed.
In November 2015, Ms. Yellen again indicated that the central bank would bump up rates slowly, a message that was repeated after the December 2015 increase. The Fed has suggested four rate hikes in 2016 but stressed that the recovery remains slow, and inflation is still feeble. “Rate increases could be faster or slower, based on economic data,” Fed officials said after the December meeting.
The Fed kept interest rates unchanged at the January 2016 meeting, but left open the possibility it could raise short-term rates when it reconvenes in March 2016. In a press release, the Fed indicated it was closely
monitoring the global economy and financial markets, noting that economic growth had slowed since late 2015 and inflation continued to run below the target 2% level.
We remind investors that a change in the Fed Funds rate does not automatically translate into a change in longer-term interest rates, which are determined by the marketplace.
On January 29, 2016, yields on high-grade municipal bonds at the short end of the yield curve were higher than they had been 6 months earlier. However, prices of longer-term, high-grade munis rallied during the same period, and their yields declined. No matter what the Fed does, this Fund’s investment team will seek to meet investors’ desires for competitive levels of tax-free income by searching for value in the muni market.
As of January 29, 2016, the average yield on 30-year, AAA-rated muni bonds was 2.79%, down 41 basis points from July 31, 2015. The average yield on 10-year, AAA-rated muni bonds was 1.81% on January 29, 2016, down 43 basis points from the July 2015 date, and the average yield on 1-year, AAA-rated muni bonds was 0.35%, up 7 basis points from the July 2015 date.
Successful investors, we have found, maintain a long-term perspective regardless of the specific developments associated with any given reporting period. To maximize the benefits that municipal bond funds seek to provide, many investors reinvest their
6 OPPENHEIMER ROCHESTER AMT-FREE MUNICIPAL FUND
dividends and allow the income generated from their investments to compound over time.
FUND PERFORMANCE
Oppenheimer Rochester AMT-Free Municipal Fund held more than 780 securities as of January 29, 2016. The Fund was invested in a broad range of sectors, providing shareholders with a diversity of holdings that we believe would be difficult and costly to replicate in an individual portfolio.
Market conditions created pressure on the dividends of many fixed-income funds this reporting period. This Fund’s Class A dividend, which was 3.5 cents per share at the outset of the reporting period, was reduced to 3.4 cents per share beginning with the January 2016 payout. In all, the Fund distributed 20.9 cents per Class A share this reporting period.
Nonetheless, the tax-exempt status of the Fund’s distributions of net investment income was a boon to investors seeking competitive levels of tax-free income. For a taxable investment to have provided a greater benefit than an investment in this Fund, it would have had to yield more than 7.97%, based on the Fund’s standardized yield as of January 31, 2016, and the top federal income tax rate for 2015. As long-time investors know, yields on fixed-income funds rise when share prices fall, and yields have historically contributed the lion’s share of the long-term total returns generated by bonds.
Municipal bonds backed by proceeds from the tobacco Master Settlement Agreement (the MSA), the national litigation settlement with U.S. tobacco manufacturers, represented 14.2% of the Fund’s total assets (14.4% of net assets) at the end of this reporting period.
We believe the securities we hold in this sector are fundamentally sound credits, and we like that “tobacco bonds” can provide tax-exempt income for investors as well as benefits to the issuing states and territories. During this reporting period, our long-term view of the sector continued to be bullish and, given attractive valuations, we believe that it is likely we will continue to hold a greater percentage of tobacco bonds in our portfolios than our peers. As in prior reporting periods, the tobacco bonds this Fund held during this reporting period, one of which was issued in the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, made all scheduled payments of interest and principal on time and in full.
As of January 29, 2016, the Fund was invested in the hospital/healthcare sector, which represented 13.8% of total assets (14.1% of net assets). Most of the Fund’s holdings in this sector are investment grade, though the Fund also invests across the credit spectrum in this sector.
The Fund’s holdings in municipal bonds issued by utilities represented 11.1% of total assets (11.3% of net assets) at the end of this reporting period. This set of holdings included sewer utilities with 5.2% of total assets (5.3% of net assets), electric utilities with 4.3% of
7 OPPENHEIMER ROCHESTER AMT-FREE MUNICIPAL FUND
total assets (4.4% of net assets), water utilities with 1.1% of total assets (1.1% of net assets), and gas utilities with 0.5% of total assets (0.5% of net assets) as of January 29, 2016. Our holdings in these sectors consist of securities in the mid-range of the credit spectrum and include bonds issued by PREPA (Puerto Rico’s electric utility authority) and PRASA (its aqueduct and sewer authority).
Securities issued in the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, which are exempt from federal, state and local income taxes, represented 8.9% of the Fund’s total assets (9.1% of net assets) at the end of this reporting period. Puerto Rico’s “tobacco bonds” are excluded from this figure, as they are backed by proceeds from the tobacco MSA and included in this Fund’s tobacco holdings. The Fund’s Puerto Rico holdings, some of which are insured, include general obligation (G.O.) debt – which is backed by the full faith and taxing authority of state and local governments – and securities from many different sectors.
Most of the Fund’s investments in securities issued in Puerto Rico are supported by taxes and other revenues and are designed to help finance electric utilities, highways and education, among other things. At the beginning of 2016, the Commonwealth made virtually all of the nearly $1 billion in payments due. A full payment of $368 million was received to cover the debt-service obligations on Puerto Rico’s G.O. securities. PREPA also made a full payment of $215 million.
Two authorities, the Puerto Rico Finance Corporation (PFC) and the Puerto Rico Infrastructure and Finance Authority (PRIFA), defaulted on $37 million. According to Gov. Alejandro García Padilla, these defaults were the result of the emergency measure he authorized to divert revenue and use it to ensure that other debt was paid in full. The Puerto Rican government decided not to make the PFC appropriation, and PRIFA revenues were subject to a “claw back.” Three bond insurers – Ambac, Assured Guaranty and FGIC – have sued the Commonwealth, arguing that the revenues should not have been diverted. On the last day of this reporting period, the Commonwealth filed a motion to dismiss the suits filed by Ambac and Assured Guaranty, which were joined.
Puerto Rico remained in the news throughout this reporting period. On August 21, 2015, the Commonwealth petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court to overturn a February 6, 2015 federal district court ruling that the Puerto Rico Public Corporation Debt Enforcement and Recovery Act (the “Recovery Act”) violated the U.S. Constitution and was invalid. As you may recall, the Recovery Act was passed in late June 2014 and the Oppenheimer Rochester municipal bond funds filed suit immediately, challenging the legislation that was designed to allow PREPA, PRASA and PRHTA (Puerto Rico’s highway authority) to restructure their debt under the supervision of a Commonwealth court. Five months later, a federal appeals court unanimously affirmed the judge’s decision.
8 OPPENHEIMER ROCHESTER AMT-FREE MUNICIPAL FUND
The Rochester Portfolio Management Team
Dan Loughran, CFA
| Scott Cottier, CFA | Troy Willis, JD, CFA | Mark DeMitry, CFA | |||||
Team Leader and | Senior Portfolio | Senior Portfolio | Senior Portfolio | |||||
Senior Portfolio | Manager | Manager | Manager | |||||
Manager | ||||||||
Michael Camarella, CFA
Senior Portfolio Manager
|
Charlie Pulire, CFA
Senior Portfolio Manager |
Elizabeth Mossow, CFA
Portfolio Manager |
In its petition, the Commonwealth argued that Puerto Rico’s issuers should have the right to restructure their debt pursuant to the terms set forth in the Commonwealth’s Recovery Act. As bondholders, we see things differently: The Commonwealth and its issuers agreed to specific and carefully constructed bond covenants when they sold securities, and the contracts should be honored.
On December 4, 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to hear the Commonwealth’s appeal of the district court and appellate court
decisions. Although we cannot guarantee that Oppenheimer Rochester will once again prevail, we continue to believe our legal arguments are strong and wish to assure shareholders that our team will always stand up for bondholders’ best interests. A Supreme Court ruling on the Commonwealth’s petition is expected in June 2016.
Throughout this reporting period, the market also reacted to developments related to the forbearance agreement that was reached in August 2014 between PREPA and many of its
9 OPPENHEIMER ROCHESTER AMT-FREE MUNICIPAL FUND
The Rochester Credit Research Team
|
|
|
| |||
Rich Stein, CFA | Chris Weiler, CFA | Bob Bertucci, CFA | Angela Uttaro | |||
Director of Credit Research | Senior Credit Analyst | Senior Credit Analyst | Senior Credit Analyst |
|
|
|
| |||
Matt Torpey, CFA | René Vecka, CFA | Jon Hagen, CFA | Alen Kreso, CFA | |||
Senior Credit Analyst | Senior Credit Analyst | Senior Credit Analyst | Senior Credit Analyst |
|
|
| ||||
Chris Meteyer, CFA | Clara Sanguinetti | Chad Osterhout | ||||
Credit Analyst | Senior Credit Analyst | Credit Analyst |
10 OPPENHEIMER ROCHESTER AMT-FREE MUNICIPAL FUND
creditors, including this Fund. In the agreement, which was extended several times beyond March 31, 2015, its initial expiration date, the bondholders agreed to forbear from exercising rights in connection with events that would constitute a default on PREPA bonds, and PREPA agreed to a variety of financial terms, to make its July 1, 2015 payment and to reach a comprehensive restructuring plan with its creditors by September 1, 2015.
The plan also seeks to reduce and/or restructure some of Puerto Rico’s debt. In a televised address, the governor said, “The plan itself will not get us out of the hole we find ourselves in. It’s time that creditors come to the table and share in the sacrifice.” We continue to believe that Puerto Rico must act within the tenets of the law, including its Constitution. Questions about the degree to which Puerto Rico and its agencies and authorities are committed to honoring their debt-service obligations continued to create significant pressure on the prices of their securities.
On September 1, 2015, PREPA and the forbearing bondholders reached an agreement in principle on the major financial terms of a securitization transaction to lower PREPA’s debt service costs. Although the proposed agreement would result in a reduction in the par value of PREPA’s existing bonds, we nevertheless believe the agreement – if implemented – will be a win for bondholders, PREPA and Puerto Ricans.
Investors should note that the new bond structure would be bankruptcy remote, which
serves to protect bondholders from event risks; that the term sheet required that the new securitization bonds earn an investment-grade rating; that the deal requires approval by the Puerto Rico Legislature and high participation by all bondholders; and that insurers reach agreement with PREPA on the treatment of the insured bonds. If all goes as planned, bondholders will be further insulated from the risks and uncertainties related to any inefficiency in PREPA’s operations and will not incur the costs that would result from a lengthy and uncertain litigation process. While we expect that all parties will work toward a restructuring support agreement, we remind investors that there is no guarantee of either a timeline or implementation.
In December 2015, after gaining several extensions related to the debt-restructuring agreement, PREPA announced that it had reached agreement with at least 70% of its creditors and its bond insurers.
PREPA and its forbearing bondholders, a group that includes the Oppenheimer Rochester funds, set a January 21, 2016 deadline for the Puerto Rico Legislature to approve legislation related to the debt-restructuring agreement. No vote was taken by that date, and PREPA asked for an extension to February 12.
The forbearing bondholders responded that the extension and a loan of $115 million were contingent on the approval of a surcharge for PREPA customers. After some back and forth, creditors agreed to provide
11 OPPENHEIMER ROCHESTER AMT-FREE MUNICIPAL FUND
$111 million of financing through the purchase of new bonds – half to be provided after the passage of the debt-restructuring legislation and the remainder after the securitization structure has been submitted to the Energy Commission for approval. PREPA accepted these terms and the deadline for the legislative vote was extended to February 16.
The Oppenheimer Rochester team has been an active participant in negotiations with Puerto Rico officials, and shareholders should be confident that we will continue to work to protect their best interests.
Meanwhile, in Washington, a December 1, 2015 hearing of the U.S. Senate Committee on the Judiciary, which is chaired by Sen. Chuck Grassley of Iowa, focused on Puerto Rico’s financial and economic circumstances. While Gov. Padilla pressed the senators to consider giving the Commonwealth access to Chapter 9 bankruptcy and asserted that “we have no cash left,” Sen. Grassley was among those who chided the governor because audited financial statements had not been provided. Sen. Grassley, in line with other Republican senators challenged the governor, saying “Let’s not forget that Puerto Rico issued its bonds with the knowledge that Ch. 9 bankruptcy wasn’t an option in the event of a default.” At the end of this reporting period, Democratic lawmakers had not gained traction on their proposals to allow the Commonwealth and/or its authorities to file for Ch. 9 bankruptcy protection.
On December 9, 2015, three Republican senators – Orrin Hatch of Utah, Lisa Murkowski
of Alaska and Sen. Grassley of Iowa – introduced the Puerto Rico Assistance Act of 2015. The bill would establish a new authority that could issue bonds and called for as much as $3 billion to help the Commonwealth stabilize its budget and debt, among other provisions. A week later, House Speaker Paul Ryan asked lawmakers to reach a “responsible solution” for Puerto Rico by March 31, 2016.
There was also talk in Congress of amending the omnibus spending bill to provide Puerto Rico access to Ch. 9, but the only measures included in the bill were related to Medicare funding and additional technical assistance from Treasury. Meanwhile, the Government Development Bank for Puerto Rico (GDB) put forth a plan calling for a “comprehensive single transaction to be accomplished through a voluntary exchange offer.”
Politicians, including some candidates for the presidency, have voiced concerns about Puerto Rico, and we believe the situation will remain political in the near term. In fact, many of the recommendations would require action by the U.S. Congress and/or the Puerto Rico Legislature.
Our investment team will continue to monitor credit rating changes and other developments related to our Puerto Rico holdings closely. Investors should note that deterioration of the Puerto Rican economy could have an adverse impact on Puerto Rico bonds and the performance of the Oppenheimer Rochester municipal funds that hold them, including this
12 OPPENHEIMER ROCHESTER AMT-FREE MUNICIPAL FUND
Fund. Our team’s commitment to protecting the interests of our shareholders is unwavering.
Given the degree to which Oppenheimer Rochester funds have been cited in news coverage about the economic and fiscal challenges facing Puerto Rico, we feel compelled to remind investors that all fund investments are actively managed. Our team is responsive to the dynamics of the market and may choose to adjust trading strategies in the interest of maximizing the potential benefits to our shareholders. Further, while we remain committed to keeping investors informed about our basic investing strategies, we do not provide comment about near-term trading strategies as we believe doing so might allow other market participants to impair our team’s ability to deliver shareholder value.
Please note: An important update on post-reporting-period developments that could have implications for the Fund’s Puerto Rico holdings can be found on page 3 of this report.
As of January 29, 2016, the Fund remained invested in land development bonds, which are Special Assessment and, in some cases, Special Tax bonds that help finance the infrastructure needs of new real estate development. At the end of this reporting period, the Special Assessment sector represented 7.7% of total assets (7.9% of net assets) and the Special Tax sector represented 4.2% of total assets (4.3% of net assets).
Overall, we believe that land development bonds have several appealing characteristics:
the debt service payments securing these bonds are on parity with real estate taxes and senior to mortgage payments, and assessments or taxes must be paid by whoever owns the land when the tax bill comes due. Additionally, we continue to believe that improvements in the housing market and the general economy could further strengthen the credit profiles of the Fund’s land development securities.
As of January 29, 2016, 6.6% of the Fund’s total assets (6.7% of net assets) continued to be invested in the higher education sector. The investment-grade bonds we hold in this sector, including two issued in Puerto Rico, have regularly provided high levels of tax-free income with what we believe to be far less credit risk than their external ratings would suggest.
G.O. securities comprised 6.0% of total assets (6.1% of net assets) as of January 29, 2016. At the end of this reporting period, the Fund held bonds issued in various municipalities, including insured bonds issued in the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico. While they have not been tested before a court, the legal protections for Puerto Rico’s G.O. debt are strong, we believe, and many of our funds have overweight positions in these bonds relative to muni funds offered by other asset managers.
The sales tax sector represented 5.1% of total assets (5.2% of net assets) as of January 29, 2016. Debt-service payments on securities in this sector are paid using the issuing
13 OPPENHEIMER ROCHESTER AMT-FREE MUNICIPAL FUND
municipality’s sales tax revenue. Based on market values as of January 29, 2016, more than half of the Fund’s holdings in this sector were issued in Puerto Rico.
During this reporting period, the Fund maintained an investment in municipal inverse-floating rate securities, which are tax-exempt securities with interest payments that move inversely to changes in short-term interest rates. “Inverse floaters” continued to provide welcomed levels of tax-free income to funds across the industry during this reporting period. We continue to believe that “inverse floaters” are an essential element of this Fund’s portfolio because they can produce attractive yields under certain market conditions.
Our approach to municipal bond investing is flexible and responsive to market conditions. Shareholders should note that market conditions during this reporting period did not affect the Fund’s overall investment goals or cause it to pay any capital gain distributions. In closing, we believe that the Fund’s structure and sector composition as well as our time-tested strategies will continue to benefit fixed-income investors through interest rate and economic cycles.
INVESTMENT STRATEGY
The Rochester investment team focuses exclusively on municipal bonds and has consistently used a time-tested, value-oriented and security-specific approach to fund management. We know that market conditions can and do fluctuate, but we do not waver in
our belief in the power of tax-free yield to help investors achieve their long-term objectives.
This Fund invests primarily in investment-grade municipal securities. It may invest up to 25% of its total assets in below-investment grade securities, or “junk” bonds; the percentage of assets is measured at the time of purchase as is the credit quality of the securities. Additionally, the credit quality is based on Nationally Recognized Statistical Rating Organization (“NRSRO”) ratings or, if no NRSRO rating, on internal ratings. As of January 29, 2016, market movements or rating changes of municipal bonds, notably the Fund’s investments in Puerto Rico paper, caused the Fund’s below-investment-grade holdings to exceed this threshold. As a result, no further purchases of below-investment-grade bonds will be made until the Fund’s holdings of these types of bonds is once again below 25% of total assets.
Our team continually searches for bonds that we believe are undervalued and can provide a meaningful level of tax-free income until maturity. Rather than making allocation shifts based on expected market conditions, we search the marketplace for what we believe to be the best values for generating income. It remains important to note that we do not manage our funds based on predictions of interest rate changes.
Instead, our investment approach involves scouring the market for municipal securities that meet our stringent credit criteria and
14 OPPENHEIMER ROCHESTER AMT-FREE MUNICIPAL FUND
buying bonds that we believe will deliver above-average yields relative to peer funds. We focus on identifying inefficiencies in market pricing that can lead to investment advantages. We seek to maintain a thoughtful mix of industry sectors, maturities and credit ratings in this Fund’s portfolio.
The Rochester team also prospects for yield-enhancing opportunities in the secondary market, often picking up odd lots that we believe can add significant incremental yield
to our portfolios. We will also look for non-rated issues with solid credit qualities, which we believe can often help enhance a fund’s tax-free yield. Investors should note that non-rated or unrated securities may or may not be the equivalent of investment grade securities.
The Rochester Way, we believe, distinguishes our approach to municipal investing from those of our competitors.
|
Daniel G. Loughran, Senior Vice President, Senior Portfolio Manager and Team Leader, on behalf of the rest of the Rochester portfolio management team: Scott S. Cottier, Troy E. Willis, Mark R. DeMitry, Michael L. Camarella, Charles S. Pulire and Elizabeth S. Mossow. |
15 OPPENHEIMER ROCHESTER AMT-FREE MUNICIPAL FUND
TOP TEN CATEGORIES
Tobacco Master Settlement Agreement | 14.2 | % | ||
Hospital/Healthcare | 13.8 | |||
Special Assessment | 7.7 | |||
Higher Education | 6.6 | |||
General Obligation | 6.0 | |||
Sewer Utilities | 5.2 | |||
Sales Tax Revenue | 5.1 | |||
Education | 5.0 | |||
Electric Utilities | 4.3 | |||
Special Tax | 4.2 |
Portfolio holdings are subject to change. Percentages are as of January 29, 2016, and are based on total assets. January 29, 2016 was the last business day of the Fund’s reporting period. See Note 2 of the accompanying Notes to Financial Statements.
CREDIT ALLOCATION
NRSRO- Rated | Sub- Adviser- Rated | Total | ||||||||||
AAA | 2.9% | 0.8% | 3.7% | |||||||||
AA | 22.1 | 0.0 | 22.1 | |||||||||
A | 13.4 | 0.4 | 13.8 | |||||||||
BBB | 17.7 | 10.4 | 28.1 | |||||||||
BB or lower | 22.4 | 9.9 | 32.3 | |||||||||
Total | 78.5% | 21.5% | 100.0% |
The percentages above are based on the market value of the securities as of January 29, 2016, and are subject to change. OppenheimerFunds, Inc. determines the credit allocation of the Fund’s assets using ratings by nationally recognized statistical rating organizations (NRSROs), such as Standard & Poor’s. For any security rated by an NRSRO other than S&P, the sub-adviser, OppenheimerFunds, Inc., converts that security’s rating to the equivalent S&P rating. If two or more NRSROs have assigned a rating to a security, the highest rating is used. For securities not rated by an NRSRO, the sub-adviser uses its own credit analysis to assign ratings in categories similar to those of S&P. The use of similar categories is not an indication that the sub-adviser’s credit analysis process is consistent or comparable with any NRSRO’s process were that NRSRO to rate the same security.
For the purposes of this Credit Allocation table, securities rated within the NRSROs’ four highest categories—AAA, AA, A and BBB—are investment-grade securities. For further details, please consult the Fund’s prospectus or Statement of Additional Information.
16 OPPENHEIMER ROCHESTER AMT-FREE MUNICIPAL FUND
Performance
DISTRIBUTION YIELDS
| ||||
As of 1/29/16 | ||||
Without Sales Charge | With Sales Charge | |||
Class A | 5.89% | 5.60% | ||
Class B | 5.27 | N/A | ||
Class C | 5.28 | N/A | ||
Class Y | 6.11 | N/A |
STANDARDIZED YIELDS
| ||||
For the 30 Days Ended 1/31/16 | ||||
Class A | 4.51% | |||
Class B | 3.97 | |||
Class C | 3.98 | |||
Class Y | 4.99 |
TAXABLE EQUIVALENT YIELDS
| ||||||
As of 1/31/16 | ||||||
Class A | 7.97% | |||||
Class B | 7.01 | |||||
Class C | 7.03 | |||||
Class Y | 8.82 |
AVERAGE ANNUAL TOTAL RETURNS WITHOUT SALES CHARGE AS OF 1/29/16
Inception Date | 6-Month | 1-Year | 5-Year | 10-Year | Since Inception | |||||||||||||||||||
Class A (OPTAX) | 10/27/76 | 5.81 % | 3.85 % | 10.30 % | 2.54 % | 5.80 % | ||||||||||||||||||
Class B (OTFBX) | 3/16/93 | 5.45 | 3.09 | 9.45 | 2.03 | 4.12 | ||||||||||||||||||
Class C (OMFCX) | 8/29/95 | 5.46 | 3.10 | 9.46 | 1.76 | 3.54 | ||||||||||||||||||
Class Y (OMFYX) | 11/29/10 | 5.96 | 4.11 | 10.56 | N/A | 8.78 | ||||||||||||||||||
AVERAGE ANNUAL TOTAL RETURNS WITH SALES CHARGE AS OF 1/29/16
|
| |||||||||||||||||||||||
Inception Date | 6-Month | 1-Year | 5-Year | 10-Year | Since Inception | |||||||||||||||||||
Class A (OPTAX) | 10/27/76 | 0.79 % | -1.09 % | 9.24 % | 2.05 % | 5.67 % | ||||||||||||||||||
Class B (OTFBX) | 3/16/93 | 0.45 | -1.80 | 9.17 | 2.03 | 4.12 | ||||||||||||||||||
Class C (OMFCX) | 8/29/95 | 4.46 | 2.12 | 9.46 | 1.76 | 3.54 | ||||||||||||||||||
Class Y (OMFYX) | 11/29/10 | 5.96 | 4.11 | 10.56 | N/A | 8.78 |
Performance data quoted represents past performance, which does not guarantee future results. The investment return and principal value of an investment in the Fund will fluctuate so that an investor’s shares, when redeemed, may be worth more or less than their original cost. Current performance may be lower or higher than the performance quoted. Returns do not consider capital gains or income taxes on an individual’s investments. Returns for periods of less than one year are not annualized. For performance data current to the most recent month-end, visit oppenheimerfunds.com or call 1.800.CALL OPP (225.5677). Fund returns include changes in share price, reinvested distributions, and the applicable sales charge: for Class A shares, the current maximum initial sales charge of
17 OPPENHEIMER ROCHESTER AMT-FREE MUNICIPAL FUND
4.75%; for Class B shares, the contingent deferred sales charge of 5% (1-year) and 2% (5- year); and for Class C, the contingent deferred sales charge of 1% for the 1-year period. There is no sales charge for Class Y shares. Because Class B shares convert to Class A shares 72 months after purchase, the 10-year return for Class B shares uses Class A performance for the period after conversion.
January 29, 2016 was the last business day of the Fund’s 6-month reporting period.
The Fund’s performance is compared to the performance of the Barclays Municipal Bond Index, an index of a broad range of investment-grade municipal bonds that is a measure of the general municipal bond market. The index is unmanaged and cannot be purchased by investors. While index comparisons may be useful to provide a benchmark for the Fund’s performance, it must be noted that the Fund’s investments are not limited to the investments comprising the index. Index performance includes reinvestment of income, but does not reflect transaction costs, fees, expenses or taxes. Index performance is shown for illustrative purposes only as a benchmark for the Fund’s performance, and does not predict or depict performance of the Fund. The Fund’s performance reflects the effects of the Fund’s business and operating expenses.
Distribution yields for Class A shares are based on dividends of $0.034 for the 26-day accrual period ended January 26, 2016. The yield without sales charge for Class A shares is calculated by dividing annualized dividends by the Class A net asset value on January 26, 2016; for the yield with sales charge, the denominator is the Class A maximum offering price on that date. Distribution yields for Class B, C and Y are annualized based on dividends of $0.0303, $0.0303 and $0.0352, respectively, for the 26-day accrual period ended January 26, 2016, and on the corresponding net asset values on that date.
Standardized yield is based on the Fund’s net investment income for the 30-day period ended January 31, 2016, and either that date’s maximum offering price (for Class A shares) or net asset value (for the other classes). Each result is compounded semiannually and annualized. Falling share prices artificially increase yields.
The average distribution yield in Lipper’s General & Insured Municipal Debt Funds category was calculated based on the distributions and the final net asset values (NAVs) of the reporting period for the funds in each category. The 12-month distribution yield is the sum of a fund’s total trailing 12-month interest and dividend payments divided by the last month’s ending share price (at NAV) plus any capital gains distributed over the same period. The calculation included 258 NAVs, one for each class of each fund in the category; a fund can have up to 4 classes. Lipper yields do not include sales charges – which, if included, would reduce results.
Taxable equivalent yield is based on the standardized yield and the 2015 top federal tax rate of 43.4%. Calculations factor in the 3.8% tax on unearned income under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, as applicable. A portion of the Fund’s distributions may be subject to tax. Capital gains distributions are taxable as capital gains. Tax treatments of the Fund’s distributions and capital gains may vary by state; investors should consult a tax advisor to determine if the Fund is appropriate for them. Each result is compounded semiannually and annualized. Falling share prices artificially increase yields. This Report must be preceded or accompanied by a Fund prospectus.
The average yields for AAA-rated municipal securities are provided by Municipal Market Advisors (MMA) and are based on its benchmark of general obligation bonds structured with
18 OPPENHEIMER ROCHESTER AMT-FREE MUNICIPAL FUND
a 5% coupon. The MMA 5% benchmark is constructed using yields from the leading underwriters, who represent a significant percentage of the primary activity of the top 10 underwriters and therefore the total issuance.
Investments in “tobacco bonds,” which are backed by the proceeds a state or territory receives from the 1998 national litigation settlement with tobacco manufacturers, may be vulnerable to economic and/or legislative events that affect issuers in a particular municipal market sector. Annual payments by MSA-participating manufacturers, for example, hinge on many factors, including annual domestic cigarette shipments, inflation and the relative market share of non-participating manufacturers. To date, we believe consumption figures remain within an acceptable range of the assumptions used to structure MSA bonds. Future MSA payments could be reduced if consumption were to fall more rapidly than originally forecast.
The Fund’s investment strategy and focus can change over time. The mention of specific fund holdings does not constitute a recommendation by OppenheimerFunds, Inc. or its affiliates.
Before investing in any of the Oppenheimer funds, investors should carefully consider a fund’s investment objectives, risks, charges and expenses. Fund prospectuses and summary prospectuses contain this and other information about the funds, and may be obtained by asking your financial advisor, visiting oppenheimerfunds.com, or calling 1.800.CALL OPP (225.5677). Read prospectuses and summary prospectuses carefully before investing.
Shares of Oppenheimer funds are not deposits or obligations of any bank, are not guaranteed by any bank, are not insured by the FDIC or any other agency and involve investment risks, including the possible loss of the principal amount invested.
19 OPPENHEIMER ROCHESTER AMT-FREE MUNICIPAL FUND
Fund Expenses. As a shareholder of the Fund, you incur two types of costs: (1) transaction costs, which may include sales charges (loads) on purchase payments and/or contingent deferred sales charges on redemptions; and (2) ongoing costs, including management fees; distribution and service fees; and other Fund expenses. These examples are intended to help you understand your ongoing costs (in dollars) of investing in the Fund and to compare these costs with the ongoing costs of investing in other mutual funds.
The examples are based on an investment of $1,000.00 invested at the beginning of the period and held for the entire 6-month period ended January 29, 2016.
Actual Expenses. The first section of the table provides information about actual account values and actual expenses. You may use the information in this section for the class of shares you hold, together with the amount you invested, to estimate the expense that you paid over the period. Simply divide your account value by $1,000.00 (for example, an $8,600.00 account value divided by $1,000.00 = 8.60), then multiply the result by the number in the first section under the heading entitled “Expenses Paid During 6 Months Ended January 29, 2016” to estimate the expenses you paid on your account during this period.
Hypothetical Example for Comparison Purposes. The second section of the table provides information about hypothetical account values and hypothetical expenses based on the Fund’s actual expense ratio for each class of shares, and an assumed rate of return of 5% per year for each class before expenses, which is not the Fund’s actual return. The hypothetical account values and expenses may not be used to estimate the actual ending account balance or expenses you paid for the period. You may use this information to compare the ongoing costs of investing in the Fund and other funds. To do so, compare this 5% hypothetical example for the class of shares you hold with the 5% hypothetical examples that appear in the shareholder reports of the other funds.
Please note that the expenses shown in the table are meant to highlight your ongoing costs only and do not reflect any transactional costs, such as front-end or contingent deferred sales charges (loads). Therefore, the “hypothetical” section of the table is useful in comparing ongoing costs only, and will not help you determine the relative total costs of owning different funds. In addition, if these transactional costs were included, your costs would have been higher.
20 OPPENHEIMER ROCHESTER AMT-FREE MUNICIPAL FUND
Actual
| Beginning Value
| Ending Account Value
| Expenses
| |||||||||||||||
Class A
|
$
|
1,000.00
|
|
$
|
1,058.10
|
|
$
|
4.92
|
| |||||||||
Class B
|
|
1,000.00
|
|
|
1,054.50
|
|
|
8.77
|
| |||||||||
Class C
|
|
1,000.00
|
|
|
1,054.60
|
|
|
8.77
|
| |||||||||
Class Y |
|
1,000.00 |
|
|
1,059.60 |
|
|
3.69 |
| |||||||||
Hypothetical | ||||||||||||||||||
(5% return before expenses)
| ||||||||||||||||||
Class A
|
|
1,000.00
|
|
|
1,020.09
|
|
|
4.83
|
| |||||||||
Class B
|
|
1,000.00
|
|
|
1,016.36
|
|
|
8.61
|
| |||||||||
Class C
|
|
1,000.00
|
|
|
1,016.36
|
|
|
8.61
|
| |||||||||
Class Y |
|
1,000.00 |
|
|
1,021.28 |
|
|
3.62 |
|
Expenses are equal to the Fund’s annualized expense ratio for that class, multiplied by the average account value over the period, multiplied by 182/366 (to reflect the one-half year period). Those annualized expense ratios, excluding indirect expenses from affiliated funds, based on the 6-month period ended January 29, 2016 are as follows:
Class
| Expense Ratios
| |||||
Class A
|
|
0.96%
|
| |||
Class B
|
|
1.71
|
| |||
Class C
|
|
1.71
|
| |||
Class Y |
|
0.72 |
|
21 OPPENHEIMER ROCHESTER AMT-FREE MUNICIPAL FUND
STATEMENT OF INVESTMENTS January 29, 2016* Unaudited
Principal Amount | Coupon | Maturity | Value | |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
Municipal Bonds and Notes—103.8% | ||||||||||||||||
Alabama—4.0% | ||||||||||||||||
$20,000,000 | Birmingham, AL Commercial Devel. Authority (Civic Center Improvements) | 5.500 % | 04/01/2041 | $ | 23,046,600 | |||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
385,000 | Birmingham, AL Private Educational Building Authority (Birmingham-Southern College) | 6.125 | 12/01/2025 | 371,891 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
210,000 | Cooperative District, AL Fort Deposit1 | 6.000 | 02/01/2036 | 191,201 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
3,500,000 | Cullman County, AL Health Care Authority (Cullman Regional Medical Center) | 6.750 | 02/01/2029 | 3,805,165 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
180,000 | Greater Montgomery, AL Educational Building Authority (Huntingdon College) | 5.100 | 05/01/2016 | 180,702 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
4,000,000 | Jefferson County, AL Sewer | 7.000 | 10/01/2051 | 4,985,280 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
20,000,000 | Jefferson County, AL Sewer | 0.000 2 | 10/01/2050 | 14,450,000 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
20,185,000 | Jefferson County, AL Sewer | 0.000 2 | 10/01/2046 | 14,784,100 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
8,750,000 | Jefferson County, AL Sewer | 0.000 2 | 10/01/2050 | 6,374,112 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
8,000,000 | Jefferson County, AL Sewer | 6.000 | 10/01/2042 | 9,342,800 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
7,500,000 | Jefferson County, AL Sewer | 6.500 | 10/01/2053 | 9,071,850 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
| 86,603,701
|
| ||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
Alaska—0.0% | ||||||||||||||||
750,000 | AK Industrial Devel. & Export Authority (Anchorage Sportsplex/Grace Community Church Obligated Group)3 | 6.120 | 08/01/2031 | 178,950 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
600,000 | AK Industrial Devel. & Export Authority Community Provider (Boys & Girls Home)4 | 5.875 | 12/01/2027 | 165,024 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
90,000 | AK Northern Tobacco Securitization Corp. (TASC) | 5.000 | 06/01/2032 | 82,421 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
| 426,395
|
| ||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
Arizona—2.4% | ||||||||||||||||
200,000 | Centerra, AZ Community Facilities District | 5.150 | 07/15/2031 | 200,416 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
1,015,000 | Estrella Mountain Ranch, AZ Community Facilities District | 5.900 | 07/15/2022 | 1,062,390 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
330,000 | Estrella Mountain Ranch, AZ Community Facilities District | 6.125 | 07/15/2027 | 343,438 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
500,000 | Estrella Mountain Ranch, AZ Community Facilities District | 6.200 | 07/15/2032 | 519,190 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
305,000 | Estrella Mountain Ranch, AZ Community Facilities District | 5.450 | 07/15/2021 | 305,708 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
200,000 | Estrella Mountain Ranch, AZ Community Facilities District | 5.625 | 07/15/2025 | 200,370 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
450,000 | Estrella Mountain Ranch, AZ Community Facilities District | 5.800 | 07/15/2030 | 450,760 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
417,000 | Festival Ranch, AZ Community Facilities District | 5.750 | 07/01/2032 | 422,479 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
595,000 | Festival Ranch, AZ Community Facilities District | 5.800 | 07/15/2032 | 618,372 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
250,000 | Gladden Farms, AZ Community Facilities District | 5.500 | 07/15/2031 | 251,620 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
495,000 | Maricopa County, AZ IDA (Immanuel Campus Care)4 | 8.500 | 04/20/2041 | 197,624 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
350,000 | Maricopa County, AZ School District No. 24 (Gila Bend) | 5.500 | 07/01/2022 | 362,757 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
200,000 | Marley Park, AZ Community Facilities District | 5.300 | 07/15/2031 | 200,642 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
288,000 | Merrill Ranch, AZ Community Facilities District No. 1 Special Assessment Lien | 5.300 | 07/01/2030 | 288,588 |
22 OPPENHEIMER ROCHESTER AMT-FREE MUNICIPAL FUND
Principal Amount | Coupon | Maturity | Value | |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
Arizona (Continued) | ||||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
$980,000 | Palm Valley, AZ Community Facility District No. 3 | 5.800 % | 07/15/2032 | $ | 995,974 | |||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
375,000 | Palm Valley, AZ Community Facility District No. 3 | 5.300 | 07/15/2031 | 376,545 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
750,000 | Phoenix, AZ IDA (Career Success Schools) | 7.000 | 01/01/2029 | 748,680 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
500,000 | Phoenix, AZ IDA (Espiritu Community Devel. Corp.) | 6.250 | 07/01/2036 | 505,240 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
1,000,000 | Phoenix, AZ IDA (Great Hearts Academies) | 6.300 | 07/01/2042 | 1,082,510 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
8,500,000 | Phoenix, AZ IDA (Rowan University) | 5.250 | 06/01/2034 | 9,601,430 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
2,960,000 | Pima County, AZ IDA (Arizona Charter School) | 5.375 | 07/01/2031 | 3,135,321 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
1,515,000 | Pima County, AZ IDA (Arizona Charter School) | 5.000 | 07/01/2026 | 1,518,530 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
3,905,000 | Pima County, AZ IDA (Center for Academic Success) | 5.500 | 07/01/2037 | 3,971,541 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
1,020,000 | Pima County, AZ IDA (Christian Senior Living) | 5.050 | 01/01/2037 | 1,022,101 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
500,000 | Pima County, AZ IDA (Facility Choice Education & Devel. Corp.) | 6.250 | 06/01/2026 | 504,630 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
1,430,000 | Pima County, AZ IDA (New Plan Learning/OG Ohio/250 Shoup Mill Obligated Group) | 8.125 | 07/01/2041 | 1,406,477 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
500,000 | Pima County, AZ IDA (P.L.C. Charter Schools) | 6.750 | 04/01/2036 | 501,360 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
250,000 | Pima County, AZ IDA (Paradise Education Center) | 6.000 | 06/01/2036 | 251,072 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
355,000 | Pima County, AZ IDA (Paradise Education Center) | 5.875 | 06/01/2033 | 349,842 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
2,595,000 | Pima County, AZ IDA (Phoenix Advantage Charter School) | 5.600 | 07/01/2023 | 2,545,228 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
650,000 | Pima County, AZ IDA (Sonoran Science Academy) | 5.750 | 12/01/2037 | 653,029 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
500,000 | Pima County, AZ IDA (Sonoran Science Academy) | 5.670 | 12/01/2027 | 503,475 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
760,000 | Pima County, AZ IDA (Tucson Country Day School) | 5.000 | 06/01/2037 | 686,918 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
250,000 | Pima County, AZ IDA (Valley Academy) | 6.500 | 07/01/2038 | 261,928 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
500,000 | Quail Creek, AZ Community Facilities District | 5.550 | 07/15/2030 | 502,145 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
1,000,000 | Rio Rico, AZ Fire District | 7.000 | 07/01/2030 | 1,209,340 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
6,500,000 | Salt Verde, AZ Financial Corp. | 5.000 | 12/01/2037 | 7,823,595 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
3,000,000 | Salt Verde, AZ Financial Corp. | 5.000 | 12/01/2032 | 3,628,650 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
100,000 | Salt Verde, AZ Financial Corp. | 5.500 | 12/01/2029 | 125,677 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
14,000 | Show Low Bluff, AZ Community Facilities District Special Assessment | 5.200 | 07/01/2017 | 14,308 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
1,655,000 | Tartesso West, AZ Community Facilities District | 5.900 | 07/15/2032 | 1,688,083 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
500,000 | Westpark, AZ Community Facilities District | 5.250 | 07/15/2031 | 502,175 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
| 51,540,158
|
| ||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
Arkansas—0.1% | ||||||||||||||||
| 1,870,000
|
| Cave Springs, AR Municipal Property (Creeks Special Sewer District)4
|
| 6.250
|
|
| 02/01/2038
|
|
| 1,112,538
|
| ||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
California—13.3% | ||||||||||||||||
675,000 | Adelanto, CA Public Utility Authority | 6.750 | 07/01/2039 | 772,153 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
1,510,000 | Anaheim, CA Community Facilities District Special Tax (Platinum Triangle) | 6.250 | 09/01/2040 | 1,558,667 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
775,000 | Anaheim, CA Community Facilities District Special Tax (Platinum Triangle) | 6.000 | 09/01/2029 | 800,110 |
23 OPPENHEIMER ROCHESTER AMT-FREE MUNICIPAL FUND
STATEMENT OF INVESTMENTS Unaudited / Continued
Principal Amount | Coupon | Maturity | Value | |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
California (Continued) | ||||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
$1,000,000 | Bonita Canyon, CA Public Facilities Financing Authority | 5.000 | % | 09/01/2026 | $ | 1,033,910 | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
2,340,000 | Bonita Canyon, CA Public Facilities Financing Authority | 5.000 | 09/01/2025 | 2,419,466 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
8,000,000 | CA County Tobacco Securitization Agency | 7.750 | 5 | 06/01/2046 | 482,320 | |||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
38,650,000 | CA County Tobacco Securitization Agency | 7.550 | 5 | 06/01/2055 | 270,550 | |||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
7,000,000 | CA County Tobacco Securitization Agency | 6.500 | 5 | 06/01/2046 | 673,050 | |||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
5,000 | CA County Tobacco Securitization Agency | 7.234 | 5 | 06/01/2033 | 1,711 | |||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
6,000,000 | CA County Tobacco Securitization Agency | 6.650 | 5 | 06/01/2046 | 181,500 | |||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
129,820,000 | CA County Tobacco Securitization Agency | 6.700 | 5 | 06/01/2050 | 2,548,367 | |||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
21,000,000 | CA County Tobacco Securitization Agency (TASC) | 6.000 | 06/01/2042 | 21,258,300 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
50,000 | CA County Tobacco Securitization Agency (TASC) | 5.875 | 06/01/2035 | 50,677 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
5,000,000 | CA County Tobacco Securitization Agency (TASC) | 5.875 | 06/01/2043 | 5,001,600 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
160,000 | CA County Tobacco Securitization Agency (TASC) | 5.700 | 2 | 06/01/2046 | 160,222 | |||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
93,000,000 | CA County Tobacco Securitization Agency (TASC) | 6.650 | 5 | 06/01/2046 | 3,726,510 | |||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
2,315,000 | CA County Tobacco Securitization Agency (TASC) | 5.125 | 06/01/2038 | 2,232,493 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
3,375,000 | CA Enterprise Devel. Authority (Sunpower Corp.) | 8.500 | 04/01/2031 | 3,870,585 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
10,000,000 | CA GO | 5.000 | 09/01/2032 | 12,148,100 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
10,000,000 | CA GO | 5.000 | 09/01/2034 | 12,072,200 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
34,700,000 | CA Golden State Tobacco Securitization Corp. (TASC) | 5.300 | 2 | 06/01/2037 | 32,629,104 | |||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
110,000,000 | CA Golden State Tobacco Securitization Corp. (TASC) | 6.000 | 5 | 06/01/2047 | 4,194,300 | |||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
20,000,000 | CA Health Facilities Financing Authority (SJHS/SJHCN/SJHE/SJHO Obligated Group) | 5.750 | 07/01/2039 | 22,983,800 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
25,000 | CA HFA (Home Mtg.) | 5.450 | 08/01/2033 | 26,534 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
350,000 | CA M-S-R Energy Authority | 6.500 | 11/01/2039 | 505,393 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
10,000,000 | CA M-S-R Energy Authority | 7.000 | 11/01/2034 | 14,800,500 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
250,000 | CA Municipal Finance Authority (Harbor Regional Center) | 8.500 | 11/01/2039 | 317,957 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
2,080,000 | CA Public Works | 6.625 | 11/01/2034 | 2,089,755 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
450,000 | CA Public Works (Various Community Colleges) | 5.750 | 10/01/2030 | 526,117 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
1,000,000 | CA School Finance Authority Charter School (Coastal Academy) | 5.000 | 10/01/2033 | 1,057,400 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
7,000,000 | CA Silicon Valley Tobacco Securitization Authority | 9.800 | 5 | 06/01/2036 | 1,802,920 | |||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
14,000,000 | CA Silicon Valley Tobacco Securitization Authority | 8.840 | 5 | 06/01/2047 | 943,320 | |||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
1,745,000 | CA Statewide CDA (Aspire Public Schools) | 6.000 | 07/01/2040 | 1,903,743 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
2,350,000 | CA Statewide CDA (Orinda Wilder) | 5.000 | 09/01/2030 | 2,667,743 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
1,450,000 | Cathedral City, CA Redevel. Agency | 5.000 | 08/01/2032 | 1,688,757 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
885,000 | Cathedral City, CA Redevel. Agency | 5.000 | 08/01/2033 | 1,028,547 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
9,985,000 | Chula Vista, CA Industrial Devel. (San Diego Gas & Electric Company) | 5.875 | 02/15/2034 | 11,556,240 |
24 OPPENHEIMER ROCHESTER AMT-FREE MUNICIPAL FUND
Principal Amount | Coupon | Maturity | Value | |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
California (Continued) | ||||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
$2,000,000 | Corona-Norco, CA Unified School District Public Financing Authority Special Tax | 5.000 % | 09/01/2036 | $ | 2,028,540 | |||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
560,000 | Coyote Canyon, CA Public Facilities Community Facilities District No. 2004-1 | 6.625 | 09/01/2039 | 626,998 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
1,000,000 | Davis, CA Special Tax Community Facilities District No. 2007-2 | 5.200 | 09/01/2027 | 1,021,170 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
2,000,000 | Davis, CA Special Tax Community Facilities District No. 2007-2 | 5.250 | 09/01/2037 | 2,029,620 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
950,000 | Elk Grove, CA Special Tax Community Facilities District No. 2005-1X | 5.250 | 09/01/2037 | 963,538 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
345,750,000 | Inland, CA Empire Tobacco Securitization Authority (TASC) | 8.001 5 | 06/01/2057 | 3,142,868 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
360,655,000 | Inland, CA Empire Tobacco Securitization Authority (TASC) | 7.000 5 | 06/01/2057 | 4,562,286 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
2,750,000 | Lammersville, CA Joint Unified School District Special Tax Community Facilities District (Mountain House-Shea) | 6.000 | 09/01/2043 | 3,262,490 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
1,000,000 | Lammersville, CA School District Community Facilities District (Mountain House) | 5.375 2 | 09/01/2032 | 1,078,810 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
500,000 | Lammersville, CA School District Community Facilities District (Mountain House) | 5.300 2 | 09/01/2030 | 541,465 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
885,000 | Lammersville, CA School District Community Facilities District (Mountain House) | 5.150 2 | 09/01/2027 | 966,332 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
1,000,000 | Lammersville, CA School District Community Facilities District (Mountain House) | 5.200 2 | 09/01/2028 | 1,088,500 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
415,000 | Lammersville, CA School District Community Facilities District (Mountain House) | 5.000 2 | 09/01/2025 | 455,898 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
375,000 | Lammersville, CA School District Community Facilities District (Mountain House) | 5.100 2 | 09/01/2026 | 410,768 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
500,000 | Lammersville, CA School District Community Facilities District (Mountain House) | 5.250 2 | 09/01/2029 | 542,445 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
1,000,000 | Lancaster, CA Financing Authority (School District) | 5.000 | 02/01/2026 | 1,004,700 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
3,950,000 | Loma Linda, CA Redevel. Agency Tax Allocation | 5.250 | 07/01/2030 | 3,958,572 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
2,000,000 | Long Beach, CA Bond Finance Authority Natural Gas | 5.500 | 11/15/2037 | 2,595,420 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
180,000 | Los Angeles, CA Community Facilities District Special Tax (Legends at Cascades) | 5.750 | 09/01/2040 | 185,715 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
1,250,000 | Lynwood, CA Redevel. Agency Tax Allocation | 7.000 | 09/01/2031 | 1,557,925 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
2,930,000 | Marysville, CA (Fremont- Rideout Health) | 5.000 | 01/01/2029 | 3,276,590 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
4,010,000 | Moreno Valley, CA Unified School District Community Facilities District No. 2005-5 | 5.500 | 09/01/2041 | 4,136,395 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
630,000 | Moreno Valley, CA Unified School District Community Facilities District Special Tax | 5.000 | 09/01/2037 | 643,325 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
1,250,000 | Moreno Valley, CA Unified School District Community Facilities District Special Tax No. 2004-3 | 5.000 | 09/01/2037 | 1,276,438 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
15,000,000 | Northern CA Tobacco Securitization Authority (TASC) | 5.500 | 06/01/2045 | 14,102,850 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
1,250,000 | Oxnard, CA Financing Authority Wastewater | 5.000 | 06/01/2032 | 1,446,163 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
850,000 | Oxnard, CA Financing Authority Wastewater | 5.000 | 06/01/2034 | 966,501 |
25 OPPENHEIMER ROCHESTER AMT-FREE MUNICIPAL FUND
STATEMENT OF INVESTMENTS Unaudited / Continued
Principal Amount | Coupon | Maturity | Value | |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
California (Continued) | ||||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
$1,500,000 | Oxnard, CA Financing Authority Wastewater | 5.000 | % | 06/01/2033 | $ | 1,719,825 | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
735,000 | Palm Desert, CA Financing Authority | 5.000 | 04/01/2027 | 738,138 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
550,000 | Perris, CA Community Facilities District Special Tax No. 2001 | 5.000 | 09/01/2026 | 551,089 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
1,510,000 | Perris, CA Community Facilities District Special Tax No. 2001 | 5.000 | 09/01/2037 | 1,512,159 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
620,000 | Perris, CA Community Facilities District Special Tax No. 2005-1 | 5.000 | 09/01/2037 | 620,471 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
1,770,000 | Poway, CA Unified School District Public Financing Authority Special Tax1 | 5.000 | 09/01/2033 | 2,063,041 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
3,150,000 | Poway, CA Unified School District Public Financing Authority Special Tax | 5.000 | 09/01/2034 | 3,660,111 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
1,260,000 | Rialto, CA Special Tax Community Facilities District No. 2006-1 | 5.350 | 09/01/2036 | 1,273,129 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
1,000,000 | Roseville, CA Natural Gas Finance Authority | 5.000 | 02/15/2025 | 1,194,090 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
10,000,000 | San Francisco, CA City & County COP6 | 5.000 | 10/01/2033 | 11,479,473 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
250,000 | San Francisco, CA City & County Redevel. Financing Authority (Mission Bay North Redevel.) | 6.750 | 08/01/2041 | 302,810 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
350,000 | San Francisco, CA City & County Redevel. Financing Authority (Mission Bay North Redevel.) | 7.000 | 08/01/2041 | 423,955 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
1,620,000 | San Gorgonio, CA Memorial Health Care District | 7.000 | 08/01/2027 | 1,778,728 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
350,000 | San Jose, CA Finance Authority (Convention Center) | 5.500 | 05/01/2031 | 410,242 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
2,210,000 | Santa Clara, CA Redevel. Agency Tax Allocation (Bayshore North) | 5.750 | 06/01/2026 | 2,613,192 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
1,880,000 | Santa Cruz, CA Redevel. Agency Tax Allocation | 5.000 | 09/01/2035 | 2,206,669 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
52,555,000 | Silicon Valley CA Tobacco Securitization Authority | 9.140 | 5 | 06/01/2047 | 3,541,156 | |||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
17,445,000 | Southern CA Tobacco Securitization Authority | 5.125 | 06/01/2046 | 16,081,324 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
47,250,000 | Southern CA Tobacco Securitization Authority | 7.100 | 5 | 06/01/2046 | 954,450 | |||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
13,675,000 | Southern CA Tobacco Securitization Authority | 6.400 | 5 | 06/01/2046 | 296,474 | |||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
100,000 | Victor Valley, CA Union High School District | 5.050 | 09/01/2025 | 100,113 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
1,160,000 | Victor Valley, CA Union High School District | 5.100 | 09/01/2035 | 1,160,429 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
| 284,538,011
|
| ||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
Colorado—1.1% | ||||||||||||||||
3,775,000 | CO Broomfield Village Metropolitan District No. 2 | 6.250 | 12/01/2032 | 3,686,401 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
294,000 | CO Crystal Crossing Metropolitan District | 6.000 | 12/01/2036 | 307,421 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
125,000 | CO E-470 Public Highway Authority | 6.814 | 5 | 09/01/2025 | 96,152 | |||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
4,250,000 | CO Educational and Cultural Facilities Authority (Rocky Mountain Academy of Evergreen) | 6.450 | 11/01/2040 | 4,782,695 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
500,000 | CO Elbert and Highway 86 Metropolitan District | 5.750 | 12/01/2036 | 358,465 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
1,000,000 | CO Elkhorn Ranch Metropolitan District3 | 6.375 | 12/01/2035 | 651,220 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
730,000 | CO Fossil Ridge Metropolitan District No. 1 | 7.250 | 12/01/2040 | 808,825 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
221,000 | CO Horse Creek Metropolitan District | 5.750 | 12/01/2036 | 193,543 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
330,000 | CO Huntington Trails Metropolitan District | 6.250 | 12/01/2036 | 331,327 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
500,000 | CO Liberty Ranch Metropolitan District | 6.250 | 12/01/2036 | 440,770 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
1,945,000 | CO North Range Metropolitan District No. 1 | 5.000 | 12/15/2024 | 1,956,009 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
500,000 | CO North Range Metropolitan District No. 2 | 5.500 | 12/15/2037 | 506,450 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
1,210,000 | CO North Range Metropolitan District No. 2 | 5.500 | 12/15/2018 | 1,239,221 |
26 OPPENHEIMER ROCHESTER AMT-FREE MUNICIPAL FUND
Principal Amount | Coupon | Maturity | Value | |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
Colorado (Continued) | ||||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
$750,000 | CO Potomac Farms Metropolitan District | 7.250 | % | 12/01/2037 | $ | 530,422 | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
107,000 | CO Potomac Farms Metropolitan District | 7.625 | 2 | 12/01/2023 | 76,296 | |||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
750,000 | CO Prairie Center Metropolitan District No. 3 | 5.400 | 12/15/2031 | 762,638 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
335,000 | CO Prairie Center Metropolitan District No. 3 | 5.250 | 12/15/2021 | 341,677 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
655,000 | CO Regency Metropolitan District | 5.750 | 12/01/2036 | 683,532 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
349,000 | CO Silver Peaks Metropolitan District3 | 5.750 | 12/01/2036 | 233,300 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
1,000,000 | CO Sorrell Ranch Metropolitan District4 | 6.750 | 12/15/2036 | 204,130 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
175,000 | Fairplay, CO Sanitation District | 5.250 | 12/15/2031 | 175,360 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
180,000 | Jefferson County, CO (Section 14 Metropolitan District) | 5.000 | 12/01/2018 | 185,137 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
1,495,000 | Public Authority for CO (Natural Gas Energy) | 6.250 | 11/15/2028 | 1,965,028 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
500,000 | Tabernash Meadows, CO Water & Sanitation District | 7.125 | 12/01/2034 | 548,825 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
250,000 | Tallyns Reach CO Metropolitan District No. 3 | 5.125 | 11/01/2038 | 267,303 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
110,000 | Tallyns Reach CO Metropolitan District No. 3 | 5.000 | 12/01/2033 | 117,459 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
3,824,161 | Woodmen Heights, CO Metropolitan District No. 1 | 0.000 | 2 | 12/15/2041 | 1,923,324 | |||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
1,025,237 | Woodmen Heights, CO Metropolitan District No. 1 | 6.000 | 12/01/2041 | 1,035,807 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
| 24,408,737
|
| ||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
Connecticut—0.0% | ||||||||||||||||
25,000 | CT H&EFA (BHosp/BHlthC/BHDF/BH&HCG Obligated Group) | 5.500 | 07/01/2032 | 25,050 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
500,000 | Georgetown, CT Special Taxing District3 | 5.125 | 10/01/2036 | 197,680 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
9,266,000 | Mashantucket Western Pequot Tribe CT7 | 4.000 | 07/01/2031 | 609,332 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
| 832,062
|
| ||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
Delaware—0.2% | ||||||||||||||||
3,172,000 | Bridgeville, DE Special Obligation (Heritage Shores) | 5.450 | 07/01/2035 | 3,173,776 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
2,271,000 | Millsboro, DE Special Obligation (Plantation Lakes) | 5.450 | 07/01/2036 | 1,799,859 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
| 4,973,635
|
| ||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
District of Columbia—1.0% | ||||||||||||||||
25,000 | District of Columbia (James F. Oyster Elementary School) | 6.450 | 11/01/2034 | 25,008 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
2,100,000 | District of Columbia Center for Strategic & International Studies | 6.625 | 03/01/2041 | 2,392,908 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
2,000,000 | District of Columbia Center for Strategic & International Studies | 6.375 | 03/01/2031 | 2,260,860 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
4,385,000 | District of Columbia Tobacco Settlement Financing Corp. | 6.750 | 05/15/2040 | 4,386,228 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
2,570,000 | District of Columbia Tobacco Settlement Financing Corp. | 6.500 | 05/15/2033 | 3,211,369 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
72,125,000 | District of Columbia Tobacco Settlement Financing Corp. (TASC) | 6.375 | 5 | 06/15/2046 | 3,267,984 | |||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
400,000 | District of Columbia University (Gallaudet University) | 5.500 | 04/01/2034 | 453,092 |
27 OPPENHEIMER ROCHESTER AMT-FREE MUNICIPAL FUND
STATEMENT OF INVESTMENTS Unaudited / Continued
Principal Amount | Coupon | Maturity | Value | |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
District of Columbia (Continued) | ||||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
$5,000,000 | District of Columbia Water & Sewer Authority1 | 5.000 % | 10/01/2039 | $ | 5,908,900 | |||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
| 21,906,349
|
| ||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
Florida—10.8% | ||||||||||||||||
100,000 | Alachua County, FL Health Facilities Authority (Shands Teaching Hospital & Clinics/Shands at Lake Shore Obligated Group) | 6.750 | 12/01/2030 | 114,445 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
1,815,000 | Amelia Concourse, FL Community Devel. District4 | 5.750 | 05/01/2038 | 1,355,859 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
610,000 | Arlington Ridge, FL Community Devel. District3 | 5.500 | 05/01/2036 | 396,506 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
435,000 | Avignon Villages, FL Community Devel. District4 | 5.300 | 05/01/2014 | 56,781 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
250,000 | Avignon Villages, FL Community Devel. District4 | 5.400 | 05/01/2037 | 32,632 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
1,805,000 | Boynton Village, FL Community Devel. District Special Assessment | 6.000 | 05/01/2038 | 1,821,371 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
1,165,000 | Cascades, FL Groveland Community Devel. District | 5.300 | 05/01/2036 | 1,166,293 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
2,320,000 | Chapel Creek, FL Community Devel. District Special Assessment4 | 5.500 | 05/01/2038 | 1,381,212 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
1,517,000 | Clearwater Cay, FL Community Devel. District4 | 5.500 | 05/01/2037 | 834,365 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
2,280,000 | Creekside, FL Community Devel. District4 | 5.200 | 05/01/2038 | 912,023 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
415,000 | Crosscreek, FL Community Devel. District4 | 5.600 | 05/01/2039 | 177,093 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
875,000 | Crosscreek, FL Community Devel. District4 | 5.500 | 05/01/2017 | 373,030 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
600,000 | Dade County, FL IDA (Miami Cerebral Palsy Residence) | 8.000 | 06/01/2022 | 600,252 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
655,000 | Durbin Crossing, FL Community Devel. District Special Assessment3 | 5.250 | 11/01/2020 | 393,052 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
350,000 | East Homestead, FL Community Devel. District | 5.000 | 11/01/2033 | 365,515 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
145,000 | East Homestead, FL Community Devel. District1 | 7.250 | 05/01/2021 | 155,843 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
410,000 | Escambia County, FL Health Facilities Authority | 5.950 | 07/01/2020 | 438,626 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
1,775,000 | FL Capital Trust Agency (Atlantic Hsg. Foundation)3 | 8.260 | 07/15/2038 | 355,071 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
5,437,000 | FL Capital Trust Agency (Atlantic Hsg. Foundation)3 | 7.000 | 07/15/2032 | 1,087,617 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
10,440,000 | FL COP (Dept. of Management Services)6 | 5.250 | 08/01/2028 | 11,598,422 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
1,250,000 | FL HEFFA (Bethune-Cookman University) | 5.375 | 07/01/2032 | 1,393,437 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
5,390,000 | FL HEFFA (Flagler College) | 5.250 | 11/01/2036 | 5,528,739 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
1,100,000 | FL Lake Ashton II Community Devel. District | 5.375 | 05/01/2036 | 953,711 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
885,000 | FL Principal One Community Devel. District | 5.650 | 05/01/2035 | 886,664 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
3,825,000 | Flora Ridge, FL Educational Facilities Benefit District | 5.300 | 05/01/2037 | 3,853,764 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
145,000 | Forest Creek, FL Community Devel. District | 5.450 | 05/01/2036 | 145,054 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
206,868 | Forest Creek, FL Community Devel. District1 | 5.450 | 05/01/2036 | 206,918 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
900,000 | Greater Lakes/Sawgrass Bay, FL Community Devel. District | 5.500 | 05/01/2038 | 892,845 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
16,000,000 | Greater Orlando, FL Aviation Authority6 | 5.000 | 10/01/2032 | 18,351,680 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
195,000 | Heritage Isles, FL Community Devel. District4 | 7.100 | 10/01/2023 | 35,915 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
120,000 | Hialeah, FL Hsg. Authority | 5.800 | 06/20/2033 | 121,634 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
120,000 | Highland Meadows, FL Community Devel. District Special Assessment, Series A | 5.500 | 05/01/2036 | 120,042 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
3,730,000 | Highlands, FL Community Devel. District | 5.550 | 05/01/2036 | 2,726,108 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
430,000 | Indigo, FL Community Devel. District4 | 5.750 | 05/01/2036 | 262,618 |
28 OPPENHEIMER ROCHESTER AMT-FREE MUNICIPAL FUND
Principal Amount | Coupon | Maturity | Value | |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
Florida (Continued) | ||||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
$35,000 | Jacksonville, FL Health Facilities Authority (Daughters of Charity Health Services of Austin) | 5.250 % | 08/15/2027 | $ | 35,916 | |||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
26,005,000 | Jacksonville, FL Health Facilities Authority (Genesis Health) SPEARS | 0.180 8 | 11/01/2032 | 26,005,000 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
1,255,000 | Lakeland, FL Educational Facilities (Florida Southern College) | 5.000 | 09/01/2029 | 1,382,194 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
1,000,000 | Lakeland, FL Educational Facilities (Florida Southern College) | 5.000 | 09/01/2037 | 1,074,760 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
485,000 | Legends Bay, FL Community Devel. District | 5.875 | 05/01/2038 | 485,475 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
1,785,000 | Lucaya, FL Community Devel. District | 5.375 | 05/01/2035 | 1,703,497 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
530,000 | Madison County, FL Mtg. (Twin Oaks) | 6.000 | 07/01/2025 | 318,000 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
1,775,000 | Magnolia Creek, FL Community Devel. District4 | 5.900 | 05/01/2039 | 372,839 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
1,425,000 | Magnolia West, FL Community Devel. District Special Assessment4 | 5.350 | 05/01/2037 | 1,140,014 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
5,000,000 | Miami-Dade County, FL School Board | 5.000 | 05/01/2027 | 6,076,250 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
2,000,000 | Miromar Lakes, FL Community Devel. District | 5.000 | 05/01/2035 | 2,026,220 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
790,000 | Miromar Lakes, FL Community Devel. District | 5.375 | 05/01/2032 | 851,865 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
3,415,000 | Monterey/Congress, FL Community Devel. District Special Assessment | 5.375 | 05/01/2036 | 3,414,932 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
8,305,000 | Moody River, FL Estates Community Devel. District | 5.350 | 05/01/2036 | 7,062,987 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
9,195,000 | Myrtle Creek, FL Improvement District Special Assessment | 5.200 | 05/01/2037 | 9,225,711 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
335,000 | Naturewalk, FL Community Devel. District3 | 5.500 | 05/01/2038 | 184,243 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
395,000 | Naturewalk, FL Community Devel. District3 | 5.300 | 05/01/2016 | 217,242 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
250,000 | Orange County, FL Health Facilities Authority (Orlando Lutheran Tower) | 5.500 | 07/01/2032 | 256,100 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
10,000,000 | Orange County, FL School Board COP6 | 5.500 | 08/01/2034 | 11,152,300 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
450,000 | Palace Coral Gables, FL Community Devel. District Special Assessment | 5.000 | 05/01/2032 | 499,338 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
1,000,000 | Palace Coral Gables, FL Community Devel. District Special Assessment | 5.625 | 05/01/2042 | 1,133,410 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
1,250,000 | Palm Bay, FL Educational Facilities (Patriot Charter School)4 | 7.000 | 07/01/2036 | 374,962 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
1,855,000 | Palm Coast Park, FL Community Devel. District Special Assessment | 5.700 | 05/01/2037 | 1,596,116 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
2,200,000 | Palm Glades, FL Community Devel. District | 5.300 | 05/01/2036 | 2,205,302 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
200,000 | Palm Glades, FL Community Devel. District Special Assessment1 | 7.250 | 08/01/2016 | 202,118 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
460,000 | Palm River, FL Community Devel. District4 | 5.150 | 05/01/2013 | 181,258 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
510,000 | Palm River, FL Community Devel. District4 | 5.375 | 05/01/2036 | 201,271 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
2,195,000 | Parkway Center, FL Community Devel. District, Series A | 6.300 | 05/01/2034 | 2,150,485 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
1,840,000 | Parkway Center, FL Community Devel. District, Series A | 6.125 | 05/01/2024 | 1,831,941 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
1,275,000 | Pine Ridge Plantation, FL Community Devel. District | 5.400 | 05/01/2037 | 1,121,949 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
1,360,000 | Pinellas County, FL Health Facility Authority (St. Mark Village) | 5.650 | 05/01/2037 | 1,437,425 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
415,000 | Poinciana West, FL Community Devel. District Special Assessment | 6.000 | 05/01/2037 | 422,117 |
29 OPPENHEIMER ROCHESTER AMT-FREE MUNICIPAL FUND
STATEMENT OF INVESTMENTS Unaudited / Continued
Principal Amount | Coupon | Maturity | Value | |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
Florida (Continued) | ||||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
$250,000 | Portico, FL Community Devel. District | 5.450 % | 05/01/2037 | $ | 213,843 | |||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
2,670,000 | Portofino Cove, FL Community Devel. District Special Assessment4 | 5.250 | 05/01/2012 | 1,201,340 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
435,000 | Portofino Cove, FL Community Devel. District Special Assessment4 | 5.500 | 05/01/2038 | 195,733 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
980,000 | Portofino Landings, FL Community Devel. District Special Assessment4 | 5.400 | 05/01/2038 | 384,866 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
285,000 | Portofino Landings, FL Community Devel. District Special Assessment4 | 5.200 | 05/01/2017 | 111,837 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
9,775,000 | Renaissance Commons, FL Community Devel. District, Series A | 5.600 | 05/01/2036 | 9,775,978 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
900,000 | Reunion East, FL Community Devel. District | 6.600 | 05/01/2036 | 909,639 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
860,000 | Reunion East, FL Community Devel. District3 | 7.375 | 05/01/2033 | 9 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
810,000 | Reunion East, FL Community Devel. District3 | 5.800 | 05/01/2036 | 8 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
990,000 | Reunion East, FL Community Devel. District | 6.600 | 05/01/2033 | 998,474 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
30,000 | Ridgewood Trails, FL Community Devel. District | 5.650 | 05/01/2038 | 30,017 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
2,500,000 | River Glen, FL Community Devel. District Special Assessment4 | 5.450 | 05/01/2038 | 997,125 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
336,525 | Santa Rosa Bay, FL Bridge Authority | 6.250 | 07/01/2028 | 230,638 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
4,535,000 | Sarasota County, FL Educational Facilities (School of Arts & Sciences) | 6.500 | 07/01/2040 | 4,938,434 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
3,445,000 | Sarasota County, FL Educational Facilities (School of Arts & Sciences) | 6.750 | 07/01/2030 | 3,837,937 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
2,530,000 | South Bay, FL Community Devel. District3 | 0.000 2 | 05/01/2036 | 1,959,536 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
935,000 | South Bay, FL Community Devel. District3 | 0.000 2 | 05/01/2025 | 728,851 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
2,035,000 | South Bay, FL Community Devel. District | 5.125 | 05/01/2020 | 1,871,223 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
1,645,000 | South Bay, FL Community Devel. District4 | 5.950 | 05/01/2036 | 411,201 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
2,210,000 | South Bay, FL Community Devel. District | 5.950 | 05/01/2036 | 2,195,657 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
1,500,000 | St. Johns County, FL IDA (Presbyterian Retirement) | 6.000 | 08/01/2045 | 1,686,645 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
400,000 | St. Johns County, FL IDA (St. John’s County Welfare Federation) | 5.250 | 10/01/2041 | 361,940 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
1,255,000 | St. John’s Forest, FL Community Devel. District, Series A | 6.125 | 05/01/2034 | 1,256,104 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
500,000 | Tern Bay, FL Community Devel. District4 | 5.375 | 05/01/2037 | 121,990 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
6,020,000 | Tern Bay, FL Community Devel. District4 | 5.000 | 05/01/2015 | 1,467,796 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
4,145,000 | Town Center, FL at Palm Coast Community Devel. District | 6.000 | 05/01/2036 | 4,044,981 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
215,000 | Turnbull Creek, FL Community Devel. District Special Assessment | 5.250 | 05/01/2037 | 211,468 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
5,105,000 | Verandah East, FL Community Devel. District | 5.400 | 05/01/2037 | 5,110,922 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
3,900,000 | Verandah, FL Community Devel District | 5.250 | 05/01/2036 | 3,637,179 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
8,185,000 | Verona Walk, FL Community Devel. District | 5.375 | 05/01/2037 | 8,187,947 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
420,000 | Villa Vizcaya, FL Community Devel. District Special Assessment4 | 5.550 | 05/01/2039 | 231,038 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
2,565,000 | Villa Vizcaya, FL Community Devel. District Special Assessment4 | 5.350 | 05/01/2017 | 1,411,007 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
4,470,000 | Vista, FL Community Devel. District Special Assessment | 5.375 | 05/01/2037 | 4,323,965 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
2,470,000 | Waterford Estates, FL Community Devel. District Special Assessment4 | 5.500 | 05/01/2037 | 726,896 |
30 OPPENHEIMER ROCHESTER AMT-FREE MUNICIPAL FUND
Principal Amount | Coupon | Maturity | Value | |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
Florida (Continued) | ||||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
$1,500,000 | Waterford Estates, FL Community Devel. District Special Assessment4 | 5.125 % | 05/01/2013 | $ 440,910 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
306,156 | Watergrass, FL Community Devel. District Special Assessment | 6.960 | 11/01/2017 | 306,585 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
5,230,000 | Watergrass, FL Community Devel. District Special Assessment | 5.500 | 05/01/2036 | 5,233,295 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
950,000 | Waterlefe, FL Community Devel. District Golf Course4 | 8.125 | 10/01/2025 | 66,025 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
660,000 | Waters Edge, FL Community Devel. District | 0.000 2 | 05/01/2039 | 553,100 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
16,000 | Waters Edge, FL Community Devel. District | 5.350 | 05/01/2039 | 16,020 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
1,785,000 | Waterstone, FL Community Devel. District4 | 5.500 | 05/01/2018 | 708,217 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
285,000 | West Villages, FL Improvement District4 | 5.350 | 05/01/2015 | 171,003 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
7,350,000 | West Villages, FL Improvement District4 | 5.800 | 05/01/2036 | 4,410,074 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
3,095,000 | West Villages, FL Improvement District | 5.500 | 05/01/2038 | 3,099,921 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
4,925,000 | Westridge, FL Community Devel. District4 | 5.800 | 05/01/2037 | 1,723,849 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
5,840,000 | Westside, FL Community Devel. District3 | 5.650 | 05/01/2037 | 2,922,570 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
1,445,000 | Wyld Palms, FL Community Devel. District4 | 5.500 | 05/01/2038 | 361,250 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
2,250,000 | Wyld Palms, FL Community Devel. District4 | 5.400 | 05/01/2015 | 562,500 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
990,000 | Zephyr Ridge, FL Community Devel. District4 | 5.625 | 05/01/2037 | 390,347 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
450,000 | Zephyr Ridge, FL Community Devel. District4 | 5.250 | 05/01/2013 | 177,183 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
| 230,353,447
|
| ||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
Georgia—0.4% | ||||||||||||||||
200,000 | Atlanta, GA Tax Allocation (Beltline) | 7.500 | 01/01/2031 | 230,266 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
565,000 | Atlanta, GA Urban Residential Finance Authority (Trestletree Village Apartments) | 5.000 | 11/01/2048 | 578,080 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
6,500,000 | DeKalb County, GA Devel. Authority Public Purpose | 5.500 | 12/10/2023 | 6,577,285 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
5,000 | GA Municipal Electric Authority | 6.600 | 01/01/2018 | 5,271 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
520,000 | Randolph County, GA GO | 5.000 | 04/01/2030 | 569,889 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
| 7,960,791
|
| ||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
Idaho—0.1% | ||||||||||||||||
60,000 | ID Health Facilities Authority (Trinity Health Corp.) | 6.250 | 12/01/2033 | 69,169 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
1,000,000 | ID Hsg. & Finance Assoc. (Compass Public Charter School) | 6.250 | 07/01/2045 | 1,073,570 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
| 1,142,739
|
| ||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
Illinois—10.7% | ||||||||||||||||
200,000 | Annawan, IL Tax Increment (Patriot Renewable Fuels) | 5.625 | 01/01/2018 | 200,124 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
915,000 | Chicago, IL Board of Education | 5.070 5 | 12/01/2024 | 607,386 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
5,000,000 | Chicago, IL Board of Education | 5.000 | 12/01/2035 | 5,035,650 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
500,000 | Chicago, IL Board of Education | 5.000 | 12/01/2024 | 512,055 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
1,405,000 | Chicago, IL Board of Education | 5.070 5 | 12/01/2024 | 932,653 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
25,000 | Chicago, IL GO | 5.000 | 01/01/2042 | 25,004 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
14,000,000 | Chicago, IL GO | 5.000 | 01/01/2029 | 14,206,360 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
10,000 | Chicago, IL GO | 5.000 | 01/01/2028 | 10,040 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
1,550,000 | Chicago, IL GO | 5.000 | 01/01/2023 | 1,554,247 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
200,000 | Chicago, IL GO | 5.000 | 01/01/2023 | 202,000 |
31 OPPENHEIMER ROCHESTER AMT-FREE MUNICIPAL FUND
STATEMENT OF INVESTMENTS Unaudited / Continued
Principal Amount | Coupon | Maturity | Value | |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
Illinois (Continued) | ||||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
$5,000,000 | Chicago, IL GO | 5.000 % | 12/01/2023 | $ | 5,124,050 | |||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
2,500,000 | Chicago, IL O’Hare International Airport | 5.000 | 01/01/2034 | 2,897,275 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
2,500,000 | Chicago, IL O’Hare International Airport | 5.000 | 01/01/2033 | 2,903,675 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
2,400,000 | Cook County, IL Community School District GO | 7.125 | 06/01/2024 | 2,853,120 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
949,000 | Cortland, IL Special Tax (Sheaffer System)3 | 5.500 | 03/01/2017 | 189,781 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
475,000 | Country Club Hills, IL GO | 5.000 | 12/01/2030 | 484,965 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
500,000 | Country Club Hills, IL GO | 5.000 | 12/01/2031 | 511,205 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
40,000 | Country Club Hills, IL GO | 5.000 | 12/01/2032 | 40,839 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
455,000 | Country Club Hills, IL GO | 5.000 | 12/01/2029 | 465,115 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
395,000 | Country Club Hills, IL GO | 5.000 | 12/01/2026 | 405,266 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
410,000 | Country Club Hills, IL GO | 5.000 | 12/01/2027 | 419,479 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
435,000 | Country Club Hills, IL GO | 5.000 | 12/01/2028 | 444,827 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
320,000 | Du Page County, IL Special Service Area No. 31 Special Tax (Monarch Landing) | 5.625 | 03/01/2036 | 320,259 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
100,000 | Du Page County, IL Special Service Area No. 31 Special Tax (Monarch Landing) | 5.400 | 03/01/2016 | 100,174 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
781,161 | Gilberts, IL Special Service Area No. 24 Special Tax (Conservancy) | 5.375 | 03/01/2034 | 684,055 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
2,000,000 | Gilberts, IL Special Service Area No. 15 | 5.000 | 03/01/2035 | 2,223,100 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
1,000,000 | Harvey, IL GO | 5.625 | 12/01/2032 | 767,670 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
2,225,000 | Harvey, IL GO | 5.500 | 12/01/2027 | 1,725,176 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
4,730,000 | Harvey, IL Hotel Motel Tax & Sales (Hotel & Conference Center) | 6.875 | 08/01/2028 | 4,768,644 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
10,000,000 | IL Finance Authority | 5.000 | 12/01/2030 | 11,425,900 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
1,920,000 | IL Finance Authority (Bethel Terrace Apartments) | 5.125 | 09/01/2025 | 1,921,114 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
2,215,000 | IL Finance Authority (Illinois Institute of Technology) | 7.125 | 02/01/2034 | 2,359,883 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
155,000 | IL Finance Authority (Illinois Institute of Technology) | 6.500 | 02/01/2023 | 164,886 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
1,010,000 | IL Finance Authority (Illinois Institute of Technology) | 5.000 | 04/01/2026 | 1,010,949 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
1,000,000 | IL Finance Authority (Illinois Institute of Technology) | 5.000 | 04/01/2036 | 999,980 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
9,660,000 | IL Finance Authority (Illinois Institute of Technology) | 5.000 | 04/01/2031 | 9,663,864 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
500,000 | IL Finance Authority (Lake Forest College) | 5.750 | 10/01/2032 | 547,090 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
450,000 | IL Finance Authority (Lake Forest College) | 6.000 | 10/01/2048 | 495,302 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
20,000,000 | IL Finance Authority (Northwestern Memorial Hospital)6 | 6.000 | 08/15/2039 | 23,306,200 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
50,000 | IL Finance Authority (OSF Healthcare System) | 7.125 | 11/15/2037 | 60,067 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
4,855,000 | IL Finance Authority (PHlth / PHN / PPH / PHP / PLC / PRC / PRMC / PSFH / PSJHC / PSM&EMC Obligated Group) | 6.125 | 05/15/2025 | 5,457,069 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
145,000 | IL Finance Authority (PHlth / PHN / PPH / PHP / PLC / PRC / PRMC / PSFH / PSJHC / PSM&EMC Obligated Group) | 6.125 | 05/15/2025 | 169,396 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
10,190,000 | IL Finance Authority (Provena Health) | 7.750 | 08/15/2034 | 12,342,943 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
7,770,000 | IL Finance Authority (Resurrection Health Care) | 5.250 | 05/15/2029 | 8,349,642 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
6,210,000 | IL Finance Authority (Resurrection Health Care)6 | 5.250 | 05/15/2029 | 6,673,266 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
5,855,000 | IL Finance Authority (Roosevelt University) | 6.500 | 04/01/2044 | 6,431,718 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
3,250,000 | IL Finance Authority (Roosevelt University) | 5.500 | 04/01/2032 | 3,321,012 |
32 OPPENHEIMER ROCHESTER AMT-FREE MUNICIPAL FUND
Principal Amount | Coupon | Maturity | Value | |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
Illinois (Continued) | ||||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
$22,915,000 | IL Finance Authority (Roosevelt University) | 6.500 % | 04/01/2039 | $ | 25,246,601 | |||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
5,600,000 | IL Finance Authority (Roosevelt University) | 5.750 | 04/01/2024 | 6,089,272 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
6,270,000 | IL Finance Authority (Roosevelt University) | 5.500 | 04/01/2037 | 6,392,516 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
2,680,000 | IL Finance Authority (Roosevelt University) | 6.250 | 04/01/2029 | 2,972,710 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
700,000 | IL GO | 5.000 | 08/01/2025 | 770,343 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
1,500,000 | IL GO | 5.000 | 09/01/2028 | 1,505,865 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
1,500,000 | IL GO | 5.000 | 03/01/2037 | 1,572,045 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
330,000 | IL Metropolitan Pier & Exposition Authority (McCormick Place Exposition) | 5.500 | 06/15/2050 | 353,651 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
200,000 | IL Regional Transportation Authority | 5.000 | 07/01/2025 | 203,768 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
2,000,000 | IL Sports Facilities Authority | 5.250 | 06/15/2032 | 2,278,640 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
1,160,000 | Jefferson County, IL High School District No. 201 (Mt. Vernon) | 6.500 | 12/30/2031 | 1,616,762 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
955,000 | Jefferson County, IL High School District No. 201 (Mt. Vernon) | 6.500 | 12/30/2028 | 1,300,920 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
895,000 | Jefferson County, IL High School District No. 201 (Mt. Vernon) | 6.500 | 12/30/2027 | 1,216,645 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
4,481,000 | Lakemoor Village, IL Special Tax | 5.000 | 03/01/2027 | 4,483,420 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
2,609,000 | Lincolnshire, IL Special Service Area No. 1 Special Tax (Sedgebrook) | 6.250 | 03/01/2034 | 2,634,516 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
1,455,000 | Manhattan, IL Special Service Area Special Tax (Groebe Farm-Stonegate)4 | 6.125 | 03/01/2040 | 262,060 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
480,000 | Markham, IL GO | 5.750 | 02/01/2028 | 481,330 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
1,094,000 | Plano, IL Special Service Area No. 54 | 6.000 | 03/01/2036 | 654,923 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
500,000 | Southwestern IL Devel. Authority (Eden Retirement Center) | 5.850 | 12/01/2036 | 468,545 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
3,990,000 | Southwestern IL Devel. Authority (Local Government Programming) | 7.000 | 10/01/2022 | 3,390,742 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
1,490,000 | Southwestern IL Devel. Authority (Village of Sauget) | 5.625 | 11/01/2026 | 1,392,360 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
12,000,000 | Springfield, IL Electric | 5.000 | 03/01/2030 | 12,050,880 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
930,000 | Volo Village, IL Special Service Area (Lancaster Falls) | 5.750 | 03/01/2036 | 950,218 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
1,853,000 | Yorkville, IL United City Special Services Area Special Tax | 5.000 | 03/01/2033 | 1,882,611 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
2,259,000 | Yorkville, IL United City Special Services Area Special Tax (Bristol Bay) | 5.875 | 03/01/2036 | 2,301,130 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
1,634,000 | Yorkville, IL United City Special Services Area Special Tax (Raintree Village II)4 | 6.250 | 03/01/2035 | 889,092 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
| 228,676,040
|
| ||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
Indiana—1.8% | ||||||||||||||||
1,700,000 | Carmel, IN Redevel. District COP | 6.500 | 07/15/2035 | 1,882,512 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
1,000,000 | Hammond, IN Local Public Improvement District | 6.750 | 08/15/2035 | 1,003,020 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
1,000,000 | Hammond, IN Local Public Improvement District | 6.500 | 08/15/2030 | 1,002,950 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
465,000 | Hammond, IN Local Public Improvement District | 5.000 | 02/01/2024 | 485,809 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
4,750,000 | IN Finance Authority (Marian University) | 6.500 | 09/15/2030 | 5,325,083 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
4,250,000 | IN Finance Authority (Marian University) | 6.375 | 09/15/2041 | 4,698,715 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
2,885,000 | IN Finance Authority (Marian University) | 5.250 | 09/15/2025 | 3,069,928 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
325,000 | IN Finance Authority Educational Facilities (Irvington Community) | 9.000 | 07/01/2039 | 328,575 |
33 OPPENHEIMER ROCHESTER AMT-FREE MUNICIPAL FUND
STATEMENT OF INVESTMENTS Unaudited / Continued
Principal Amount | Coupon | Maturity | Value | |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
Indiana (Continued) | ||||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
$7,500,000 | IN Municipal Power Agency | 5.000 % | 01/01/2037 | $ | 8,826,525 | |||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
3,985,000 | Indianapolis, IN Multifamily Hsg. (Berkley Common) | 6.000 | 07/01/2040 | 4,196,006 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
1,000,000 | Indianapolis, IN Multifamily Hsg. (Berkley Common) | 5.750 | 07/01/2030 | 1,069,210 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
2,025,000 | Indianapolis, IN Multifamily Hsg. (Stonekey Apartments) | 7.000 | 02/01/2039 | 2,206,055 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
2,071,755 | North Manchester, IN Economic Devel. (Peabody Retirement Community)3,7 | 1.000 | 12/01/2045 | 40,544 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
2,466,162 | North Manchester, IN Economic Devel. (Peabody Retirement Community) | 6.050 8 | 12/01/2045 | 2,066,915 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
1,960,000 | Shelbyville, IN Redevel. District Tax Increment (Central Shelbyville Economic) | 6.500 | 07/01/2022 | 2,186,341 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
| 38,388,188
|
| ||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
Iowa—0.1% | ||||||||||||||||
750,000 | IA Finance Authority (Amity Fellowserve) | 6.500 | 10/01/2036 | 756,510 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
400,000 | IA Finance Authority (Boys & Girls Home and Family Services)4 | 5.900 | 12/01/2028 | 110,016 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
1,685,000 | IA Finance Authority (Mercy Medical Center) | 5.000 | 08/15/2028 | 1,921,338 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
365,000 | IA Finance Authority Senior Hsg. (Wedum Walnut Ridge) | 5.375 | 06/01/2025 | 343,513 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
| 3,131,377
|
| ||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
Kansas—0.1% | ||||||||||||||||
535,000 | Hays, KS Sales Tax | 6.000 | 01/01/2025 | 535,754 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
100,000 | Overland Park, KS Transportation Devel. District (Grass Creek) | 4.850 | 09/01/2016 | 100,877 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
2,360,000 | Pittsburgh, KS Special Obligation (North Broadway Redevel.) | 4.900 | 04/01/2024 | 2,318,346 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
| 2,954,977
|
| ||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
Kentucky—0.9% | ||||||||||||||||
5,000,000 | KY Municipal Power Agency1 | 5.000 | 09/01/2034 | 5,810,450 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
11,525,000 | KY Municipal Power Agency1 | 5.000 | 09/01/2033 | 13,449,445 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
80,000 | Owens County, KY Waterworks System (AWCC/KAWC Obligated Group) | 6.250 | 06/01/2039 | 90,414 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
15,000 | Springfield, KY Educational Devel. (St. Catherine College) | 5.750 | 10/01/2035 | 15,020 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
| 19,365,329
|
| ||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
Louisiana—3.0% | ||||||||||||||||
2,000,000 | Jefferson Parish, LA Hospital Service District No. 1 (West Jefferson Medical Center) | 5.250 | 01/01/2028 | 2,357,340 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
635,000 | LA Citizens Property Insurance Corp. | 5.000 | 06/01/2024 | 756,095 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
950,000 | LA Citizens Property Insurance Corp. | 5.000 | 06/01/2024 | 1,118,350 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
8,280,000 | LA HFA (La Chateau) | 6.875 | 09/01/2029 | 9,047,142 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
5,000,000 | LA HFA (La Chateau) | 7.250 | 09/01/2039 | 5,450,750 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
35,000 | LA Local Government EF&CD Authority (Baton Rouge Student Hsg.) | 5.250 | 09/01/2035 | 29,400 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
1,295,000 | LA Local Government EF&CD Authority (Baton Rouge Student Hsg.)1 | 5.250 | 09/01/2018 | 1,269,100 |
34 OPPENHEIMER ROCHESTER AMT-FREE MUNICIPAL FUND
Principal Amount | Coupon | Maturity | Value | |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
Louisiana (Continued) | ||||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
$3,085,000 | LA Local Government EF&CD Authority (Baton Rouge Student Hsg.) | 5.500 % | 09/01/2022 | $ | 2,838,200 | |||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
1,240,000 | LA Local Government EF&CD Authority (Capital Projects and Equipment) | 6.550 | 09/01/2025 | 1,391,255 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
2,500,000 | LA Public Facilities Authority (Nineteenth Judicial District Court Building) | 5.000 | 06/01/2042 | 2,746,250 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
19,275,000 | LA Public Facilities Authority (OLOLRMC/OLOLMC Obligated Group) | 6.750 | 07/01/2039 | 23,012,422 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
50,000 | LA Stadium & Exposition District | 5.000 | 07/01/2028 | 58,530 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
2,000,000 | LA Stadium & Exposition District | 5.000 | 07/01/2032 | 2,291,540 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
12,000,000 | St. John the Baptist Parish, LA Revenue (Marathon Oil Corp.) | 5.125 | 06/01/2037 | 11,980,560 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
| 64,346,934
|
| ||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
Maine—0.4% | ||||||||||||||||
5,000,000 | ME H&HEFA (Maine General Medical Center) | 7.500 | 07/01/2032 | 6,015,350 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
2,000,000 | ME H&HEFA (Maine General Medical Center) | 6.750 | 07/01/2036 | 2,284,480 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
| 8,299,830
|
| ||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
Maryland—0.2% | ||||||||||||||||
1,000,000 | MD EDC Student Hsg. (Morgan State University) | 5.000 | 07/01/2034 | 1,070,140 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
65,000 | MD H&HEFA (Johns Hopkins Hospital) | 5.375 | 07/01/2020 | 65,200 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
1,865,000 | Prince Georges County, MD Special District (Victoria Falls) | 5.250 | 07/01/2035 | 1,877,346 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
2,287,212 | Salisbury, MD Special Obligation (Villages at Salisbury Lake)3 | 5.250 5 | 01/01/2037 | 240,958 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
| 3,253,644
|
| ||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
Massachusetts—0.6% | ||||||||||||||||
260,000 | MA Devel. Finance Agency (Evergreen Center) | 5.500 | 01/01/2035 | 260,284 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
25,000 | MA Devel. Finance Agency (Lasell College) | 6.000 | 07/01/2031 | 29,286 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
750,000 | MA Devel. Finance Agency (Lasell College) | 5.500 | 07/01/2026 | 858,510 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
92,782 | MA Devel. Finance Agency (Linden Ponds) | 5.500 | 11/15/2046 | 80,270 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
461,488 | MA Devel. Finance Agency (Linden Ponds) | 0.605 5 | 11/15/2056 | 2,672 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
14,103 | MA Devel. Finance Agency (Linden Ponds) | 6.250 | 11/15/2039 | 13,644 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
1,733,606 | MA Devel. Finance Agency (Linden Ponds) | 6.250 | 11/15/2046 | 1,671,560 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
6,770,000 | MA Devel. Finance Agency (Merrimack College) | 5.250 | 07/01/2042 | 7,197,932 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
40,000 | MA Devel. Finance Agency (Northern Berkshire Community) | 6.250 | 08/15/2029 | 30,132 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
121,780 | MA Devel. Finance Agency (Northern Berkshire Healthcare)3 | 0.000 | 02/15/2043 | 3,653 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
106,259 | MA Devel. Finance Agency (Northern Berkshire Healthcare)4 | 6.000 | 02/15/2043 | 4,250 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
70,174 | MA Devel. Finance Agency (Northern Berkshire Healthcare)3 | 0.000 | 02/15/2043 | 2,105 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
2,000,000 | MA Devel. Finance Agency (UMHC/UMMC/HHH&H/ HHosp Obligated Group)1 | 5.000 | 07/01/2036 | 2,298,480 |
35 OPPENHEIMER ROCHESTER AMT-FREE MUNICIPAL FUND
STATEMENT OF INVESTMENTS Unaudited / Continued
Principal Amount | Coupon | Maturity | Value | |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
Massachusetts (Continued) | ||||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
$25,000 | MA H&EFA (Beverly Hospital Corp.) | 5.250 % | 07/01/2023 | $ | 25,088 | |||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
| 12,477,866
|
| ||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
Michigan—4.6% | ||||||||||||||||
680,000 | Detroit, MI City School District | 5.000 | 05/01/2031 | 759,478 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
1,100,000 | Detroit, MI City School District | 5.000 | 05/01/2028 | 1,240,646 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
775,000 | Detroit, MI GO | 5.000 | 04/01/2028 | 803,605 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
5,000 | Detroit, MI Local Devel. Finance Authority | 5.500 | 05/01/2021 | 4,923 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
13,435,000 | Detroit, MI Sewer Disposal System | 7.500 | 07/01/2033 | 15,764,763 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
2,250,000 | Detroit, MI Sewer Disposal System | 6.500 | 07/01/2024 | 2,560,432 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
2,155,000 | Detroit, MI Water and Sewerage Dept. | 5.000 | 07/01/2032 | 2,402,351 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
1,000,000 | Detroit, MI Water Supply System | 5.000 | 07/01/2036 | 1,092,050 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
1,555,000 | Detroit, MI Water Supply System | 5.000 | 07/01/2033 | 1,569,601 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
495,000 | Grand Traverse Academy, MI Public School Academy | 5.000 | 11/01/2022 | 500,267 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
1,000,000 | Grand Traverse Academy, MI Public School Academy | 4.750 | 11/01/2032 | 957,550 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
2,200,000 | Grand Traverse Academy, MI Public School Academy | 4.625 | 11/01/2027 | 2,152,040 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
2,100,000 | MI Finance Authority (City of Detroit) | 5.000 | 04/01/2028 | 2,183,370 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
5,000,000 | MI Finance Authority (Detroit School District) | 5.500 | 06/01/2021 | 5,409,050 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
930,000 | MI Finance Authority (Detroit Water & Sewer) | 5.000 | 07/01/2027 | 1,096,303 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
1,000,000 | MI Finance Authority (Detroit Water & Sewer) | 5.000 | 07/01/2033 | 1,142,250 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
1,100,000 | MI Finance Authority (Detroit Water & Sewer) | 5.000 | 07/01/2035 | 1,250,348 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
2,200,000 | MI Finance Authority (Detroit Water & Sewer) | 5.000 | 07/01/2034 | 2,510,266 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
895,000 | MI Finance Authority (Detroit Water & Sewer) | 5.000 | 07/01/2026 | 1,061,739 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
2,450,000 | MI Finance Authority (Detroit Water & Sewer) | 5.000 | 07/01/2032 | 2,808,312 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
7,035,000 | MI Finance Authority (Detroit Water & Sewer) | 5.000 | 07/01/2023 | 8,443,829 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
1,000,000 | MI Finance Authority (Detroit Water & Sewer) | 5.000 | 07/01/2025 | 1,195,100 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
1,000,000 | MI Finance Authority (Detroit Water & Sewer) | 5.000 | 07/01/2034 | 1,138,280 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
600,000 | MI Finance Authority (Old Redford Public School Academy) | 5.900 | 12/01/2030 | 611,448 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
14,600,000 | MI Hospital Finance Authority (Trinity Health)6 | 6.125 | 12/01/2023 | 16,757,588 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
1,155,000 | MI Public Educational Facilities Authority (Old Redford Academy) | 6.000 | 12/01/2035 | 1,155,277 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
407,500 | MI Strategic Fund Limited Obligation (Wolverine Human Services) | 7.875 | 08/31/2028 | 419,998 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
8,975,288 | MI Strategic Fund Limited Obligation (Wolverine Human Services) | 5.850 | 08/31/2027 | 8,359,763 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
1,323,000,000 | MI Tobacco Settlement Finance Authority | 9.838 5 | 06/01/2058 | 6,654,690 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
250,000 | Monroe County, MI Hospital Finance Authority (Mercy Memorial Hospital Corp.) | 5.500 | 06/01/2035 | 254,458 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
400,000 | Plymouth, MI Educational Center Charter School (Public School Academy) | 5.375 | 11/01/2030 | 284,060 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
1,325,000 | Plymouth, MI Educational Center Charter School (Public School Academy) | 5.625 | 11/01/2035 | 907,864 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
500,000 | Renaissance, MI Public School Academy | 6.000 | 05/01/2037 | 534,275 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
2,875,000 | University of Michigan | 5.000 | 04/01/2031 | 3,590,185 |
36 OPPENHEIMER ROCHESTER AMT-FREE MUNICIPAL FUND
Principal Amount | Coupon | Maturity | Value | |||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
Michigan (Continued) | ||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
$20,000 | Wayne County, MI Building Authority | 5.250 % | 06/01/2016 | $ | 20,080 | |||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
97,596,239 | ||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
Minnesota—0.1% | ||||||||||||||
885,000 | Columbia Heights, MN EDA Tax Increment (Huset Park Area Redevel.) | 5.375 | 02/15/2032 | 885,301 | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
965,000 | Mound, MN Hsg. & Redevel. Authority (Metroplaines) | 5.000 | 02/15/2027 | 974,148 | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
70,000 | St. Anthony, MN Hsg. & Redevel. Authority (Silver Lake Village)1 | 5.375 | 08/01/2021 | 71,767 | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
90,000 | St. Paul, MN Port Authority (Great Northern) | 6.000 | 03/01/2030 | 90,154 | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
2,021,370 | ||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
Mississippi—0.0% | ||||||||||||||
215,000 | Gulfport, MS Hospital Facility (Memorial Hospital at Gulfport) | 5.750 | 07/01/2031 | 215,765 | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
750,000 | Meridian, MS Tax Increment (Meridian Crossroads) | 8.750 | 12/01/2024 | 841,898 | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
1,057,663 | ||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
Missouri—2.1% | ||||||||||||||
200,000 | Belton, MO Tax Increment (Belton Town Center) | 5.625 | 03/01/2025 | 200,934 | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
900,000 | Branson, MO IDA (Branson Hills Redevel.) | 5.750 | 05/01/2026 | 913,041 | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
365,000 | Branson, MO IDA (Branson Hills Redevel.) | 7.050 | 05/01/2027 | 365,485 | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
1,175,000 | Branson, MO IDA (Branson Landing) | 5.250 | 06/01/2021 | 1,175,834 | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
6,325,000 | Branson, MO IDA (Branson Shoppe Redevel.) | 5.950 | 11/01/2029 | 6,400,457 | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
675,000 | Broadway-Fairview, MO Transportation Devel. District (Columbia) | 5.875 | 12/01/2031 | 547,223 | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
400,000 | Chillicothe, MO Tax Increment (South U.S. 65) | 5.625 | 04/01/2027 | 275,204 | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
400,000 | Chillicothe, MO Tax Increment (South U.S. 65) | 5.500 | 04/01/2021 | 319,160 | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
1,330,000 | Columbia, MO Hsg. Authority (Stuart Parker Hsg. Devel. Group) | 5.125 | 12/15/2050 | 1,345,348 | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
580,000 | Columbia, MO Hsg. Authority (Stuart Parker Hsg. Devel. Group) | 5.000 | 12/15/2040 | 587,644 | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
155,000 | Hawk Ridge, MO Transportation Devel. District1 | 4.650 | 02/01/2017 | 155,524 | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
3,840,000 | Hawk Ridge, MO Transportation Devel. District | 5.000 | 02/01/2030 | 3,464,102 | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
14,360,000 | Hazelwood, MO Transportation Devel. District (370/Missouri Bottom Road/Tausig Road) | 7.200 | 05/01/2033 | 13,074,493 | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
270,000 | Kansas City, MO Tax Increment (Briarcliff West) | 5.150 | 06/01/2016 | 272,238 | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
600,000 | Kansas City, MO Tax Increment (Shoal Creek Parkway) | 6.500 | 06/01/2025 | 602,694 | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
900,000 | Kansas City, MO Tax Increment (Southtown)1 | 6.000 | 03/01/2017 | 928,899 | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
250,000 | Lees Summit, MO IDA (Kensington Farms) | 5.750 | 03/01/2029 | 152,415 | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
140,000 | Lees Summit, MO IDA (Kensington Farms) | 5.500 | 03/01/2021 | 85,917 | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
770,000 | Liberty, MO Tax Increment (Liberty Triangle) | 5.875 | 10/01/2029 | 789,843 | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
2,100,000 | Maplewood, MO Tax (Maplewood South Redevel.) | 5.750 | 11/01/2026 | 2,102,604 | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
355,000 | MO Grindstone Plaza Transportation Devel. District | 5.500 | 10/01/2031 | 328,403 | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
199,000 | Northwoods, MO Transportation Devel. District1 | 5.850 | 02/01/2031 | 188,176 | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
1,500,000 | Osage Beach, MO Tax Increment (Prewitts Point) | 5.000 | 05/01/2023 | 1,498,185 |
37 OPPENHEIMER ROCHESTER AMT-FREE MUNICIPAL FUND
STATEMENT OF INVESTMENTS Unaudited / Continued
Principal Amount | Coupon | Maturity | Value | |||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
Missouri (Continued) | ||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
$2,500,000 | Richmond Heights, MO Tax Increment & Transportation Sales Tax | 5.625 % | 11/01/2025 | $ | 2,511,450 | |||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
481,000 | St. Louis, MO Tax Increment (1505 Missouri Avenue Redevel.)3 | 6.000 | 08/04/2025 | 265,892 | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
846,000 | St. Louis, MO Tax Increment (1601 Washington Redevel.) | 6.000 | 08/21/2026 | 557,726 | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
1,879,000 | St. Louis, MO Tax Increment (1619 Washington Redevel.) | 5.500 | 03/09/2027 | 1,033,469 | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
662,000 | St. Louis, MO Tax Increment (Pet Building Redevel.) | 5.500 | 05/29/2028 | 444,076 | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
545,000 | St. Louis, MO Tax Increment (Printers Lofts)3 | 6.000 | 08/21/2026 | 259,404 | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
466,000 | St. Louis, MO Tax Increment (Washington East Condominiums)4 | 5.500 | 01/20/2028 | 328,027 | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
783,000 | St. Louis, MO Tax Increment (Washington East Condominiums) | 5.500 | 01/20/2028 | 650,971 | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
1,080,000 | St. Louis, MO Tax Increment Financing (Ludwig Lofts)3 | 6.690 | 04/21/2029 | 674,320 | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
373,000 | St. Louis, MO Tax Increment Financing, Series A | 5.500 | 09/02/2028 | 243,685 | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
3,255,000 | St. Louis, MO Tax Increment, Series A | 6.600 | 01/21/2028 | 2,436,009 | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
320,000 | Stone Canyon, MO Improvement District (Infrastructure)4 | 5.750 | 04/01/2027 | 97,587 | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
620,000 | Stone Canyon, MO Improvement District (Infrastructure)4 | 5.700 | 04/01/2022 | 189,094 | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
155,000 | Suemandy, MO Mid-Rivers Community Improvement District | 7.500 | 10/01/2029 | 162,468 | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
45,628,001 | ||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
Montana—0.2% | ||||||||||||||
11,710,000 | Hardin, MT Tax Increment Industrial Infrastructure Devel. (Rocky Mountain Power)3 | 6.250 2 | 09/01/2031 | 4,097,914 | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
375,000 | MT Facilities Finance Authority (St. John’s Lutheran) | 6.000 | 05/15/2025 | 380,569 | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
4,478,483 | ||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
Nebraska—0.8% | ||||||||||||||
9,510,000 | NE Central Plains Gas Energy | 5.250 | 09/01/2037 | 10,762,182 | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
2,915,000 | NE Educational Facilities Authority (Midland Lutheran College) | 5.600 | 09/15/2029 | 2,833,671 | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
1,540,000 | NE Public Power Generation Agency (Whelan Energy Center) | 5.000 | 01/01/2032 | 1,587,586 | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
1,800,000 | Santee Sioux Nation, NE Tribal Health Care (Indian Health Service) | 8.750 | 10/01/2020 | 1,806,030 | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
16,989,469 | ||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
Nevada—0.7% | ||||||||||||||
260,000 | Clark County, NV Improvement District | 5.050 | 02/01/2031 | 257,759 | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
325,000 | Clark County, NV Improvement District | 5.000 | 02/01/2026 | 325,062 | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
5,105,000 | Director of the State of NV Dept. of Business & Industry (Las Vegas Monorail)3 | 6.850 5 | 01/01/2019 | 2,552,398 | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
210,000 | Mesquite, NV Special Improvement District (Canyon Creek)1 | 5.300 | 08/01/2018 | 207,635 |
38 OPPENHEIMER ROCHESTER AMT-FREE MUNICIPAL FUND
Principal Amount | Coupon | Maturity | Value | |||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
Nevada (Continued) | ||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
$100,000 | Mesquite, NV Special Improvement District (Canyon Creek) | 5.250 % | 08/01/2017 | $ | 99,515 | |||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
70,000 | Mesquite, NV Special Improvement District (Canyon Creek) | 5.200 | 08/01/2016 | 69,918 | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
435,000 | Mesquite, NV Special Improvement District No. 07-01 (Anthem at Mesquite)1 | 6.000 | 08/01/2027 | 442,808 | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
625,000 | Mesquite, NV Special Improvement District No. 07-01 (Anthem at Mesquite)1 | 6.150 | 08/01/2037 | 634,781 | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
390,000 | Mesquite, NV Special Improvement District No. 07-01 (Anthem at Mesquite)1 | 5.850 | 08/01/2018 | 398,806 | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
815,000 | Mesquite, NV Special Improvement District No. 07-01 (Anthem at Mesquite)1 | 6.000 | 08/01/2023 | 832,368 | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
7,420,000 | Sparks, NV Redevel. Agency (Redevel Area No. 2) | 6.700 | 06/01/2028 | 7,823,425 | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
1,855,000 | Sparks, NV Redevel. Agency (Redevel Area No. 2) | 6.400 | 06/01/2020 | 1,988,875 | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
15,633,350 | ||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
New Hampshire—2.8% | ||||||||||||||
3,220,000 | Manchester, NH Hsg. & Redevel. Authority, Series B | 5.700 5 | 01/01/2030 | 1,482,424 | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
305,000 | Manchester, NH Hsg. & Redevel. Authority, Series B | 5.650 5 | 01/01/2029 | 150,340 | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
495,000 | Manchester, NH Hsg. & Redevel. Authority, Series B | 6.000 5 | 01/01/2023 | 365,246 | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
405,000 | NH Business Finance Authority (Huggins Hospital) | 6.875 | 10/01/2039 | 433,512 | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
250,000 | NH H&EFA (Dartmouth-Hitchcock Clinic/Mary Hitchcock Memorial Hospital Obligated Group) | 5.000 | 08/01/2035 | 250,742 | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
4,010,000 | NH H&EFA (Franklin Pierce College) | 6.050 | 10/01/2034 | 3,891,865 | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
20,860,000 | NH H&EFA (LRG Healthcare)6 | 7.000 | 04/01/2038 | 25,264,380 | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
21,575,000 | NH H&EFA (LRG Healthcare)6 | 5.500 | 10/01/2034 | 24,969,966 | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
475,000 | NH H&EFA (LRG Healthcare) | 5.500 | 10/01/2034 | 549,727 | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
1,500,000 | NH H&EFA (Southern New Hampshire University) | 5.000 | 01/01/2027 | 1,642,035 | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
1,270,000 | NH HE&HFA (Franklin Pierce College) | 5.300 | 10/01/2028 | 1,177,938 | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
60,178,175 | ||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
New Jersey—2.4% | ||||||||||||||
4,000,000 | Casino Reinvestment Devel. Authority of NJ | 5.250 | 11/01/2039 | 4,175,080 | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
2,000,000 | Casino Reinvestment Devel. Authority of NJ | 5.000 | 11/01/2032 | 2,197,540 | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
2,000,000 | Casino Reinvestment Devel. Authority of NJ | 5.000 | 11/01/2030 | 2,223,120 | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
1,000,000 | Newark, NJ GO | 5.000 | 07/15/2029 | 1,091,990 | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
2,100,000 | NJ Health Care Facilities Financing Authority (University Hospital) | 5.000 | 07/01/2029 | 2,456,538 | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
3,640,000 | NJ Tobacco Settlement Financing Corp. | 5.000 | 06/01/2029 | 3,456,107 | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
4,555,000 | NJ Transportation Trust Fund Authority | 6.000 | 06/15/2035 | 5,175,755 | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
5,975,000 | NJ Transportation Trust Fund Authority | 5.500 | 12/15/2021 | 7,011,543 | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
7,015,000 | NJ Transportation Trust Fund Authority | 5.000 | 06/15/2032 | 7,589,038 | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
7,000,000 | NJ Turnpike Authority | 5.000 | 01/01/2034 | 8,214,290 | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
5,000,000 | NJ Turnpike Authority | 5.000 | 01/01/2033 | 5,884,650 |
39 OPPENHEIMER ROCHESTER AMT-FREE MUNICIPAL FUND
STATEMENT OF INVESTMENTS Unaudited / Continued
Principal Amount | Coupon | Maturity | Value | |||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
New Jersey (Continued) | ||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
$1,850,000 | South Jersey, NJ Transportation Authority | 5.000 % | 11/01/2033 | $ | 2,079,881 | |||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
51,555,532 | ||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
New Mexico—0.1% | ||||||||||||||
230,000 | Boulders, NM Pubic Improvement District | 5.750 | 10/01/2044 | 236,350 | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
270,000 | Montecito Estates, NM Public Improvement District | 7.000 | 10/01/2037 | 276,604 | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
1,925,000 | NM Trails Public Improvement District | 7.750 | 10/01/2038 | 1,899,821 | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
2,412,775 | ||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
New York—4.3% | ||||||||||||||
380,000 | NY Counties Tobacco Trust II (TASC) | 5.750 | 06/01/2043 | 382,014 | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
10,500,000 | NY MTA, Series C-1 | 5.000 | 11/15/2035 | 12,456,570 | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
3,000,000 | NY MTA, Series E | 5.000 | 11/15/2030 | 3,584,580 | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
10,000,000 | NYC Municipal Water Finance Authority | 5.000 | 06/15/2039 | 11,771,500 | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
11,825,000 | NYC Transitional Finance Authority (Future Tax) | 5.000 | 08/01/2032 | 14,243,212 | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
8,720,000 | NYC Transitional Finance Authority (Future Tax) | 5.000 | 08/01/2031 | 10,657,497 | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
2,650,000 | NYS DA (New York State Dormitory Authority) | 5.000 | 07/01/2028 | 3,265,621 | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
10,000,000 | NYS DA (Sales Tax) | 5.000 | 03/15/2033 | 12,227,800 | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
8,710,000 | NYS DA (St. Mary’s Hospital for Children) | 7.875 | 11/15/2041 | 9,450,089 | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
7,385,000 | Suffolk, NY Tobacco Asset Securitization Corp. | 5.375 | 06/01/2028 | 7,420,965 | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
5,255,000 | Westchester County, NY Healthcare Corp., Series A | 5.000 | 11/01/2030 | 5,935,943 | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
91,395,791 | ||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
North Carolina—0.0% | ||||||||||||||
20,000 | NC Medical Care Commission (AHACHC) | 5.800 | 10/01/2034 | 20,055 | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
North Dakota—0.3% | ||||||||||||||
6,650,000 | Hazen, ND Healthcare (Hazen Memorial Hospital Asscociation) | 2.500 | 07/01/2017 | 6,654,455 | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
Ohio—8.1% | ||||||||||||||
2,250,000 | Bowling Green, OH Student Hsg. (CFP I-Bowling Green State University) | 6.000 | 06/01/2045 | 2,436,323 | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
3,440,000 | Bowling Green, OH Student Hsg. (CFP I-Bowling Green State University) | 5.750 | 06/01/2031 | 3,758,303 | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
6,500,000 | Buckeye, OH Tobacco Settlement Financing Authority (TASC) | 6.250 2 | 06/01/2037 | 6,047,990 | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
22,380,000 | Buckeye, OH Tobacco Settlement Financing Authority (TASC) | 6.000 | 06/01/2042 | 20,071,503 | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
743,000,000 | Buckeye, OH Tobacco Settlement Financing Authority (TASC) | 7.501 5 | 06/01/2052 | 7,630,610 | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
970,100,000 | Buckeye, OH Tobacco Settlement Financing Authority (TASC) | 7.251 5 | 06/01/2047 | 70,953,114 | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
11,460,000 | Buckeye, OH Tobacco Settlement Financing Authority (TASC) | 5.125 | 06/01/2024 | 10,505,267 | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
2,555,000 | Buckeye, OH Tobacco Settlement Financing Authority (TASC) | 5.375 | 06/01/2024 | 2,378,169 | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
8,820,000 | Buckeye, OH Tobacco Settlement Financing Authority (TASC) | 5.750 | 06/01/2034 | 7,817,960 |
40 OPPENHEIMER ROCHESTER AMT-FREE MUNICIPAL FUND
Principal Amount | Coupon | Maturity | Value | |||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
Ohio (Continued) | ||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
$20,360,000 | Buckeye, OH Tobacco Settlement Financing Authority (TASC) | 5.875 % | 06/01/2030 | $ | 18,363,498 | |||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
2,165,000 | Centerville, OH Health Care (Bethany Lutheran Village) | 6.000 | 11/01/2038 | 2,249,868 | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
3,445,000 | Cleveland-Cuyahoga County, OH Port Authority | 6.000 | 11/15/2035 | 4,024,862 | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
10,000 | Cuyahoga County, OH Hospital (Metro Health System) | 5.500 | 02/15/2027 | 10,026 | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
1,050,000 | Greene County, OH University Hsg. (Central State University) | 5.625 | 09/01/2032 | 1,038,240 | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
1,000,000 | Greene County, OH University Hsg. (Central State University) | 5.500 | 09/01/2027 | 999,890 | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
2,500,000 | Grove City, OH Tax Increment Financing | 5.375 | 12/01/2031 | 2,537,650 | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
95,000 | Grove City, OH Tax Increment Financing | 5.125 | 12/01/2016 | 97,858 | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
745,000 | Jeffrey Place, OH New Community Authority (Jeffrey Place Redevel.) | 5.000 | 12/01/2022 | 751,966 | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
5,860,000 | Port of Greater Cincinnati, OH Devel. Authority (Public Parking Infrastructure) | 6.400 | 02/15/2034 | 4,142,141 | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
2,100,000 | Port of Greater Cincinnati, OH Devel. Authority (Public Parking Infrastructure) | 6.300 | 02/15/2024 | 1,522,227 | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
4,065,000 | Portage County, OH Port Authority (Northeast Ohio Medical University) | 5.000 | 12/01/2037 | 4,358,574 | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
510,000 | Ross County, OH Hospital (Adena Health System) | 5.750 | 12/01/2028 | 571,373 | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
645,000 | Toledo-Lucas County, OH Port Authority (Town Square at Levis Commons) | 5.400 | 11/01/2036 | 315,824 | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
172,583,236 | ||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
Oklahoma—0.6% | ||||||||||||||
12,720,000 | Grady County, OK Criminal Justice Authority | 7.000 | 11/01/2041 | 12,802,299 | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
770,000 | Langston, OK EDA (Langston University) | 5.250 | 05/01/2026 | 773,126 | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
13,575,425 | ||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
Oregon—0.2% | ||||||||||||||
2,250,000 | Forest Grove, OR Revenue (Pacific University) | 5.000 | 05/01/2036 | 2,577,938 | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
500,000 | OR Facilities Authority (Concordia University) | 6.375 | 09/01/2040 | 540,915 | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
330,000 | OR Facilities Authority (Concordia University) | 6.125 | 09/01/2030 | 353,750 | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
3,472,603 | ||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
Pennsylvania—2.8% | ||||||||||||||
5,000,000 | Bethlehem, PA Area School District | 5.000 | 08/01/2033 | 5,862,350 | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
1,425,000 | Delaware County, PA Authority (Neumann University) | 5.000 | 10/01/2031 | 1,602,156 | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
2,305,000 | Delaware County, PA Authority (Neumann University) | 5.000 | 10/01/2035 | 2,542,231 | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
1,000,000 | East Hempfield Township, PA IDA (Millersville University Student Services) | 5.000 | 07/01/2047 | 1,054,660 | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
265,000 | Luzerne County, PA IDA | 7.500 | 12/15/2019 | 278,984 | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
500,000 | Luzerne County, PA IDA | 7.750 | 12/15/2027 | 523,850 | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
3,005,000 | Northumberland County, PA IDA (NHS Youth Services)1 | 7.750 | 02/15/2029 | 2,132,198 | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
25,000 | Northumberland County, PA IDA (NHS Youth Services) | 5.500 | 02/15/2033 | 22,639 | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
10,010,000 | PA Commonwealth Financing Authority | 5.000 | 06/01/2035 | 11,445,534 |
41 OPPENHEIMER ROCHESTER AMT-FREE MUNICIPAL FUND
STATEMENT OF INVESTMENTS Unaudited / Continued
Principal Amount | Coupon | Maturity | Value | |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
Pennsylvania (Continued) | ||||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
$10,000,000 | PA GO | 5.000 % | 10/15/2031 | $ | 11,835,500 | |||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
2,000,000 | PA HEFA (Shippensburg University) | 6.250 | 10/01/2043 | 2,245,940 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
3,000,000 | PA Public School Building Authority (School District of Philadelphia) | 5.000 | 04/01/2030 | 3,238,650 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
5,000,000 | PA Public School Building Authority (School District of Philadelphia) | 5.000 | 04/01/2031 | 5,372,650 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
1,500,000 | PA Turnpike Commission | 0.000 2 | 12/01/2038 | 1,757,445 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
4,000,000 | PA Turnpike Commission | 5.000 | 12/01/2040 | 4,588,880 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
685,000 | Philadelphia, PA Authority for Industrial Devel. (Architecture & Design Charter School) | 6.125 | 03/15/2043 | 746,527 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
735,000 | Philadelphia, PA H&HEFA (Centralized Comprehensive Human Services) | 7.250 | 01/01/2021 | 737,631 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
55,000 | Philadelphia, PA School District | 6.000 | 09/01/2038 | 62,320 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
3,435,000 | Philadelphia, PA School District | 6.000 | 09/01/2038 | 3,805,637 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
5,000 | Philadelphia, PA School District | 6.000 | 09/01/2038 | 5,665 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
5,000 | Philadelphia, PA School District | 6.000 | 09/01/2038 | 5,665 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
59,867,112 | ||||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
Rhode Island—0.9% | ||||||||||||||||
4,915,000 | Central Falls, RI Detention Facility4 | 7.250 | 07/15/2035 | 1,223,294 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
45,000 | Providence, RI HDC (Barbara Jordan Apartments) | 6.750 | 07/01/2025 | 45,158 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
725,000 | RI Health & Educational Building Corp. (EPBH/RIH/TMH Obligated Group) | 7.000 | 05/15/2039 | 837,600 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
13,600,000 | RI Health & Educational Building Corp. (EPBH/RIH/TMH Obligated Group) | 7.000 | 05/15/2039 | 15,837,472 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
20,000 | RI Hsg. & Mtg. Finance Corp. (Homeownership Opportunity) | 6.500 | 04/01/2027 | 20,201 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
18,045,000 | RI Tobacco Settlement Financing Corp. (TASC) | 6.125 5 | 06/01/2052 | 817,258 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
18,780,983 | ||||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
South Carolina—1.0% | ||||||||||||||||
1,560,000 | Lancaster County, SC (Sun City Carolina Lakes) | 5.450 | 12/01/2037 | 1,561,669 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
4,843,000 | Richland County, SC Assessment Revenue (Village at Sandhill Improvement District) | 6.200 | 11/01/2036 | 4,844,550 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
600,000 | SC Connector 2000 Assoc. Toll Road, Series B | 5.535 5 | 01/01/2020 | 377,736 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
6,565,000 | SC Connector 2000 Assoc. Toll Road, Series B | 5.781 5 | 01/01/2021 | 3,936,702 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
11,240,000 | SC Connector 2000 Assoc. Toll Road, Series B | 6.697 5 | 01/01/2026 | 5,144,323 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
2,000,000 | SC Jobs-EDA (Coastal Hsg. Foundation) | 6.500 | 04/01/2042 | 2,451,120 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
2,500,000 | SC Jobs-EDA (Coastal Hsg. Foundation) | 6.250 | 04/01/2035 | 3,038,425 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
21,354,525 | ||||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
South Dakota—0.1% | ||||||||||||||||
1,500,000 | SD Educational Enhancement Funding Corp. Tobacco Settlement | 5.000 | 06/01/2027 | 1,721,265 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
Tennessee—0.4% | ||||||||||||||||
125,000 | Johnson City, TN H&EFB (Johnson City Medical Center) | 5.250 | 07/01/2028 | 125,551 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
500,000 | Metropolitan Government Nashville & Davidson Counties, TN H&EFB (Belmont University) | 5.000 | 11/01/2027 | 561,940 |
42 OPPENHEIMER ROCHESTER AMT-FREE MUNICIPAL FUND
Principal Amount | Coupon | Maturity | Value | |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
Tennessee (Continued) | ||||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
$5,665,000 | TN Energy Acquisition Gas Corp. | 5.000 % | 02/01/2027 | $ | 6,850,345 | |||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
7,537,836 | ||||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
Texas—4.7% | ||||||||||||||||
60,000 | Collin County, TX HFC (Community College District Foundation) | 5.250 | 06/01/2031 | 58,334 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
1,100,000 | Dallas County, TX Flood Control District | 5.000 | 04/01/2032 | 1,133,561 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
7,250,000 | Donna, TX GO1 | 6.250 | 02/15/2037 | 7,272,765 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
4,714,000 | Escondido, TX Public Improvement District (Horseshoe Bay) | 7.250 | 10/01/2033 | 4,757,699 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
16,000,000 | Houston, TX Airport System, Series A6 | 5.500 | 07/01/2039 | 17,631,520 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
160,000 | Houston, TX Higher Education Finance Corp. (Cosmos Foundation) | 6.500 | 05/15/2031 | 204,322 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
140,000 | Houston, TX Higher Education Finance Corp. (Cosmos Foundation) | 6.500 | 05/15/2031 | 167,558 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
250,000 | Houston, TX Higher Education Finance Corp. (Ninos) | 6.000 | 08/15/2041 | 270,367 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
250,000 | Houston, TX Higher Education Finance Corp. (Ninos) | 6.000 | 08/15/2036 | 271,990 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
30,000 | Huntsville, TX GO COP | 5.000 | 08/15/2032 | 30,112 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
7,465,000 | Irving, TX Hotel Occupancy | 5.500 | 08/15/2038 | 7,907,376 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
2,305,000 | Maverick County, TX GO COP | 8.750 | 03/01/2034 | 1,849,440 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
685,000 | Maverick County, TX GO COP | 8.750 | 03/01/2034 | 549,617 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
555,000 | New Hope, TX Educational Facilities Finance Corp. Student Hsg. (Stephenville-Tarleton State University) | 5.875 | 04/01/2036 | 631,096 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
780,000 | New Hope, TX Educational Facilities Finance Corp. Student Hsg. (Stephenville-Tarleton State University) | 6.000 | 04/01/2045 | 888,295 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
700,000 | Newark, TX Cultural Education Facilities Finance Corp. (A.W. Brown Fellowship Charter School) | 6.000 | 08/15/2042 | 715,820 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
1,695,000 | Northeast, TX Higher Education Facilities Corp. (Eagle Advantage Schools) | 5.000 | 08/15/2040 | 1,718,086 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
3,695,000 | Sabine River, TX Authority Pollution Control (TXU Electric Company)4 | 6.150 | 08/01/2022 | 110,480 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
9,675,000 | Spring, TX Independent School District | 5.000 | 08/15/2031 | 11,883,415 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
4,315,000 | Spring, TX Independent School District | 5.000 | 08/15/2029 | 5,364,192 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
4,570,000 | Tarrant County, TX Cultural Education Facilities Finance Corp. (Baylor Health Care System)6 | 6.250 | 11/15/2029 | 5,245,900 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
10,775,000 | Tarrant County, TX Cultural Education Facilities Finance Corp. (Baylor Health Care System)6 | 6.250 | 11/15/2029 | 12,368,616 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
6,255,000 | Trophy Club, TX Public Improvement (Highlands Trophy Club) | 7.750 | 10/01/2037 | 6,920,782 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
485,000 | TX Dormitory Finance Authority (Temple Junior College Foundation) | 6.000 | 09/01/2033 | 436,786 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
110,000 | TX Dormitory Finance Authority (Temple Junior College Foundation) | 5.750 | 09/01/2027 | 101,913 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
4,500,000 | TX Municipal Gas Acquisition & Supply Corp. | 6.250 | 12/15/2026 | 5,569,875 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
1,700,000 | TX Public Finance Authority Charter School Finance Corp. (Cosmos Foundation) | 6.000 | 02/15/2030 | 2,037,399 |
43 OPPENHEIMER ROCHESTER AMT-FREE MUNICIPAL FUND
STATEMENT OF INVESTMENTS Unaudited / Continued
Principal Amount | Coupon | Maturity | Value | |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
Texas (Continued) | ||||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
$660,000 | TX Public Finance Authority Charter School Finance Corp. (Ed-Burnham Wood) | 6.250 % | 09/01/2036 | $ | 677,642 | |||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
1,085,000 | TX Public Finance Authority Charter School Finance Corp. (New Fontiers School) | 5.800 | 08/15/2040 | 1,176,845 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
1,900,000 | University of Texas (Permanent University Fund) | 5.000 | 07/01/2029 | 2,365,120 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
100,316,923 | ||||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
Utah—0.0% | ||||||||||||||||
275,000 | Utah County, UT Charter School (Renaissance Academy) | 5.625 | 07/15/2037 | 276,963 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
Vermont—0.1% | ||||||||||||||||
445,000 | Burlington, VT GO | 5.000 | 11/01/2032 | 491,872 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
350,000 | Burlington, VT GO | 5.000 | 11/01/2027 | 394,131 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
336,658 | VT Educational & Health Buildings Financing Agency (Marlboro College) | 2.779 | 04/01/2019 | 332,188 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
1,218,191 | ||||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
Virginia—0.9% | ||||||||||||||||
825,000 | Buena Vista, VA Public Recreational Facilities Authority (Golf Course) | 5.500 | 07/15/2035 | 759,256 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
1,895,000 | Buena Vista, VA Public Recreational Facilities Authority (Golf Course) | 5.250 | 07/15/2025 | 1,740,292 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
416,000 | Celebrate, VA North CDA Special Assessment3 | 6.750 | 03/01/2034 | 268,699 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
3,500,000 | Celebrate, VA South CDA Special Assessment4 | 6.250 | 03/01/2037 | 1,924,895 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
750,000 | Farms New Kent, VA Community Devel. Authority Special Assessment3 | 5.800 | 03/01/2036 | 187,515 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
3,000,000 | Farms New Kent, VA Community Devel. Authority Special Assessment4 | 5.450 | 03/01/2036 | 750,090 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
371,000 | Farms New Kent, VA Community Devel. Authority Special Assessment3 | 5.125 | 03/01/2036 | 92,761 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
900,000 | New Port, VA CDA4 | 5.600 | 09/01/2036 | 449,946 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
3,240,000 | Peninsula, VA Town Center Community Devel. Authority Special Obligation1 | 6.450 | 09/01/2037 | 3,420,306 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
2,565,000 | Stafford County & Staunton, VA IDA (Virginia Municipal League/Mt. Rogers) | 6.500 | 08/01/2038 | 2,662,316 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
675,000 | Suffolk, VA IDA (Lake Prince Center) | 5.300 | 09/01/2031 | 678,233 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
950,000 | VA College Building Authority (Regent University) | 5.000 | 06/01/2026 | 951,947 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
2,000,000 | VA College Building Authority (Regent University) | 5.000 | 06/01/2029 | 2,002,480 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
585,000 | VA College Building Authority Educational Facilities (Regent University) | 5.000 | 06/01/2036 | 585,140 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
35,170,000 | VA Tobacco Settlement Authority | 5.670 5 | 06/01/2047 | 712,896 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
162,770,000 | VA Tobacco Settlement Authority | 5.770 5 | 06/01/2047 | 2,801,272 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
19,988,044 | ||||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
Washington—3.1% | ||||||||||||||||
4,145,000 | Bremerton, WA Hsg. Authority | 5.500 | 06/01/2037 | 4,147,114 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
1,000,000 | Bremerton, WA Hsg. Authority | 5.300 | 06/01/2026 | 1,000,690 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
75,000 | Kelso County, WA Hsg. Authority (Chinook & Columbia Apartments) | 5.600 | 03/01/2028 | 75,025 |
44 OPPENHEIMER ROCHESTER AMT-FREE MUNICIPAL FUND
Principal Amount | Coupon | Maturity | Value | |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
Washington (Continued) | ||||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
$2,720,642 | Tacoma, WA Consolidated Local Improvements District No. 65 | 5.750 % | 04/01/2043 | $ | 2,720,751 | |||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
3,920,000 | Vancouver, WA Hsg. Authority (Springbrook Village Apartments) | 5.000 | 03/01/2025 | 4,410,392 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
80,000 | Vancouver, WA Hsg. Authority (Springbrook Village Apartments) | 5.000 | 03/01/2025 | 92,458 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
33,785,000 | WA Health Care Facilities Authority (Catholic Health Initiatives) | 6.375 | 10/01/2036 | 38,225,362 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
15,000,000 | WA Health Care Facilities Authority (PH&S / PEMC / PH&SO / PHSSC / LCMAS / SJHC / PSMMC / SPH&HSC / PHlthC / PH&SW Obligated Group) | 5.250 | 10/01/2033 | 16,556,400 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
67,228,192 | ||||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
West Virginia—0.2% | ||||||||||||||||
1,885,000 | Brooke County, WV (Bethany College) | 6.750 | 10/01/2037 | 2,088,184 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
1,960,000 | Brooke County, WV (Bethany College) | 6.500 | 10/01/2031 | 2,158,352 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
4,246,536 | ||||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
Wisconsin—1.5% | ||||||||||||||||
1,475,000 | WI Center District, Series A | 5.000 | 12/15/2029 | 1,679,833 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
5,000,000 | WI GO | 6.000 | 05/01/2036 | 5,784,900 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
1,230,000 | WI H&EFA (Beloit College) | 6.125 | 06/01/2035 | 1,378,092 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
750,000 | WI H&EFA (Beloit College) | 6.125 | 06/01/2039 | 836,243 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
1,300,000 | WI H&EFA (Richland Hospital) | 5.375 | 06/01/2028 | 1,301,638 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
17,260,000 | WI H&EFA (SSM Health Care Corp.) | 5.250 | 06/01/2034 | 19,342,937 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
465,000 | WI Public Finance Authority (Las Ventanas Retirement Community) | 7.000 | 10/01/2042 | 468,376 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
185,000 | WI Public Finance Authority (Las Ventanas Retirement Community) | 0.181 5 | 10/01/2042 | 57,874 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
200,000 | WI Public Finance Authority (Las Ventanas Retirement Community) | 36.060 5 | 10/01/2042 | 2 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
650,000 | WI Public Finance Authority (Thomas Jefferson Classical Academy) | 7.125 | 07/01/2042 | 706,855 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
500,000 | WI Public Finance Authority Charter School (Explore Knowledge Foundation) | 5.750 | 07/15/2032 | 545,810 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
350,000 | WI Public Finance Authority Charter School (Explore Knowledge Foundation) | 6.000 | 07/15/2042 | 381,804 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
32,484,364 | ||||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
U.S. Possessions—9.6% | ||||||||||||||||
7,315,000 | Puerto Rico Aqueduct & Sewer Authority | 5.000 | 07/01/2033 | 4,913,485 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
1,885,000 | Puerto Rico Aqueduct & Sewer Authority | 5.250 | 07/01/2029 | 1,272,903 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
1,925,000 | Puerto Rico Aqueduct & Sewer Authority | 6.000 | 07/01/2047 | 1,317,431 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
5,400,000 | Puerto Rico Aqueduct & Sewer Authority | 5.750 | 07/01/2037 | 3,721,950 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
11,375,000 | Puerto Rico Children’s Trust Fund (TASC) | 5.500 | 05/15/2039 | 11,425,732 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
3,000,000 | Puerto Rico Commonwealth GO | 6.000 | 07/01/2040 | 1,909,860 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
2,000,000 | Puerto Rico Commonwealth GO | 6.000 | 07/01/2039 | 1,273,160 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
9,000,000 | Puerto Rico Commonwealth GO | 5.750 | 07/01/2036 | 5,707,620 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
4,000,000 | Puerto Rico Commonwealth GO | 5.625 | 07/01/2033 | 2,530,880 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
1,250,000 | Puerto Rico Commonwealth GO | 5.375 | 07/01/2030 | 787,687 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
5,000,000 | Puerto Rico Commonwealth GO | 6.500 | 07/01/2037 | 3,195,200 |
45 OPPENHEIMER ROCHESTER AMT-FREE MUNICIPAL FUND
STATEMENT OF INVESTMENTS Unaudited / Continued
Principal Amount | Coupon | Maturity | Value | |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
U.S. Possessions (Continued) | ||||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
$1,500,000 | Puerto Rico Commonwealth GO | 5.500 % | 07/01/2026 | $ | 946,875 | |||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
5,000,000 | Puerto Rico Commonwealth GO | 5.750 | 07/01/2028 | 3,168,900 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
500,000 | Puerto Rico Commonwealth GO | 5.500 | 07/01/2021 | 513,995 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
3,000,000 | Puerto Rico Commonwealth GO | 5.250 | 07/01/2023 | 1,889,790 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
4,210,000 | Puerto Rico Commonwealth GO | 5.500 | 07/01/2039 | 2,659,457 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
2,610,000 | Puerto Rico Commonwealth GO | 5.000 | 07/01/2023 | 1,640,881 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
3,000,000 | Puerto Rico Commonwealth GO | 5.125 | 07/01/2028 | 1,890,240 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
4,020,000 | Puerto Rico Commonwealth GO | 5.250 | 07/01/2030 | 2,536,017 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
4,515,000 | Puerto Rico Commonwealth GO | 5.000 | 07/01/2020 | 2,867,431 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
5,000,000 | Puerto Rico Electric Power Authority, Series A9 | 6.750 | 07/01/2036 | 2,957,100 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
20,460,000 | Puerto Rico Electric Power Authority, Series A9 | 5.000 | 07/01/2029 | 12,062,193 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
2,830,000 | Puerto Rico Electric Power Authority, Series AAA9 | 5.250 | 07/01/2028 | 1,668,455 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
3,000,000 | Puerto Rico Electric Power Authority, Series CCC9 | 5.250 | 07/01/2027 | 1,768,710 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
1,850,000 | Puerto Rico Electric Power Authority, Series CCC9 | 5.000 | 07/01/2022 | 1,092,425 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
2,500,000 | Puerto Rico Electric Power Authority, Series CCC9 | 5.000 | 07/01/2028 | 1,473,750 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
260,000 | Puerto Rico Electric Power Authority, Series RR | 5.000 | 07/01/2024 | 258,315 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
4,000,000 | Puerto Rico Electric Power Authority, Series SS | 5.000 | 07/01/2025 | 3,933,520 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
3,000,000 | Puerto Rico Electric Power Authority, Series TT9 | 5.000 | 07/01/2026 | 1,769,310 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
4,500,000 | Puerto Rico Electric Power Authority, Series TT9 | 5.000 | 07/01/2032 | 2,652,570 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
5,000,000 | Puerto Rico Electric Power Authority, Series TT9 | 5.000 | 07/01/2037 | 2,946,700 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
1,500,000 | Puerto Rico Electric Power Authority, Series VV9 | 5.500 | 07/01/2020 | 887,310 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
1,690,000 | Puerto Rico Electric Power Authority, Series VV | 5.250 | 07/01/2025 | 1,693,042 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
5,000,000 | Puerto Rico Electric Power Authority, Series WW9 | 5.500 | 07/01/2020 | 2,957,700 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
3,050,000 | Puerto Rico Electric Power Authority, Series WW9 | 5.500 | 07/01/2038 | 1,797,121 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
2,750,000 | Puerto Rico Electric Power Authority, Series WW9 | 5.375 | 07/01/2023 | 1,622,885 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
1,985,000 | Puerto Rico Electric Power Authority, Series WW9 | 5.250 | 07/01/2025 | 1,170,713 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
2,000,000 | Puerto Rico Electric Power Authority, Series WW9 | 5.000 | 07/01/2028 | 1,179,000 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
5,000,000 | Puerto Rico Electric Power Authority, Series WW9 | 5.500 | 07/01/2021 | 2,954,300 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
1,670,000 | Puerto Rico Electric Power Authority, Series XX9 | 5.250 | 07/01/2040 | 984,014 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
410,000 | Puerto Rico Electric Power Authority, Series ZZ9 | 5.250 | 07/01/2022 | 242,085 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
7,300,000 | Puerto Rico Electric Power Authority, Series ZZ9 | 5.250 | 07/01/2024 | 4,306,708 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
40,000 | Puerto Rico Highway & Transportation Authority | 5.000 | 07/01/2022 | 17,358 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
3,000,000 | Puerto Rico Highway & Transportation Authority, Series L | 5.250 | 07/01/2038 | 2,734,800 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
3,500,000 | Puerto Rico Highway & Transportation Authority, Series M | 5.000 | 07/01/2046 | 770,595 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
8,000,000 | Puerto Rico Infrastructure4 | 7.075 5 | 07/01/2030 | 1,254,640 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
850,000 | Puerto Rico Infrastructure3 | 5.500 | 07/01/2024 | 329,375 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
65,000 | Puerto Rico Infrastructure4 | 5.000 | 07/01/2041 | 8,125 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
750,000 | Puerto Rico Infrastructure Financing Authority3 | 5.500 | 07/01/2028 | 290,625 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
8,695,000 | Puerto Rico Infrastructure Financing Authority4 | 6.070 5 | 07/01/2031 | 1,299,033 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
3,200,000 | Puerto Rico ITEMECF (Guaynabo Municipal Government Center) | 5.625 | 07/01/2022 | 2,756,672 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
1,230,000 | Puerto Rico ITEMECF (Polytechnic University) | 5.000 | 08/01/2032 | 1,060,555 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
190,000 | Puerto Rico ITEMECF (University of the Sacred Heart) | 5.000 | 10/01/2022 | 145,971 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
2,000,000 | Puerto Rico Public Buildings Authority | 6.000 | 07/01/2041 | 1,137,300 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
8,575,000 | Puerto Rico Public Buildings Authority | 6.250 | 07/01/2026 | 5,120,904 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
9,000,000 | Puerto Rico Public Buildings Authority | 6.000 | 07/01/2028 | 9,139,950 |
46 OPPENHEIMER ROCHESTER AMT-FREE MUNICIPAL FUND
Principal Amount | Coupon | Maturity | Value | |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
U.S. Possessions (Continued) | ||||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
$240,000 | Puerto Rico Public Buildings Authority | 5.250 % | 07/01/2042 | $ | 130,829 | |||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
3,300,000 | Puerto Rico Public Buildings Authority | 5.000 | 07/01/2032 | 1,827,375 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
1,000,000 | Puerto Rico Public Buildings Authority | 6.250 | 07/01/2031 | 584,580 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
4,940,000 | Puerto Rico Public Buildings Authority | 5.375 | 07/01/2033 | 2,729,251 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
5,615,000 | Puerto Rico Public Finance Corp., Series B4 | 5.500 | 08/01/2031 | 828,213 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
6,380,000 | Puerto Rico Sales Tax Financing Corp. | 8.550 5 | 08/01/2023 | 1,798,267 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
17,650,000 | Puerto Rico Sales Tax Financing Corp., Series A | 5.500 | 08/01/2037 | 6,762,951 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
270,000 | Puerto Rico Sales Tax Financing Corp., Series A | 5.000 | 08/01/2043 | 102,128 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
18,875,000 | Puerto Rico Sales Tax Financing Corp., Series A | 9.410 5 | 08/01/2036 | 1,903,733 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
4,365,000 | Puerto Rico Sales Tax Financing Corp., Series A | 5.375 | 08/01/2039 | 1,667,212 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
50,000,000 | Puerto Rico Sales Tax Financing Corp., Series A | 7.280 5 | 08/01/2034 | 5,355,000 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
20,215,000 | Puerto Rico Sales Tax Financing Corp., Series A | 5.750 | 08/01/2037 | 7,796,117 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
29,670,000 | Puerto Rico Sales Tax Financing Corp., Series A | 6.110 5 | 08/01/2044 | 4,758,178 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
15,000,000 | Puerto Rico Sales Tax Financing Corp., Series A | 6.375 | 08/01/2039 | 5,878,050 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
7,000,000 | Puerto Rico Sales Tax Financing Corp., Series A | 6.500 | 08/01/2044 | 2,751,770 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
29,160,000 | Puerto Rico Sales Tax Financing Corp., Series C | 5.000 | 08/01/2040 | 18,468,486 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
32,560,000 | Puerto Rico Sales Tax Financing Corp., Series C | 8.020 5 | 08/01/2038 | 2,865,280 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
2,205,000 | Puerto Rico Sales Tax Financing Corp., Series C | 6.000 | 08/01/2042 | 855,849 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
3,685,000 | Puerto Rico Sales Tax Financing Corp., Series C | 0.000 2 | 08/01/2032 | 1,373,657 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
7,450,000 | Puerto Rico Sales Tax Financing Corp., Series C | 5.250 | 08/01/2041 | 2,836,440 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
205,886,689 | ||||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
Total Municipal Bonds and Notes (Cost $2,477,287,427) | 2,222,852,993 | |||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
Corporate Bonds and Notes—0.0% | ||||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
68,697 | Las Vegas Monorail Co., Sr. Sec. Nts.7,10 | 5.500 | 07/15/2019 | 2,070 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
18,270 | Las Vegas Monorail Co., Sub. Nts.7,10 | 5.500 8 | 07/15/2055 | 1,324 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
Total Corporate Bonds and Notes (Cost $138) | 3,394 | |||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
| Total Investments, at Value (Cost $2,477,287,565)—103.8% | 2,222,856,387 | ||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
| Net Other Assets (Liabilities)—(3.8) | (81,959,079) | ||||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
| Net Assets—100.0% | $ | 2,140,897,308 | |||||||||||||
|
|
Footnotes to Statement of Investments
*January 29, 2016 represents the last business day of the Fund’s reporting period. See Note 2 of the accompanying Notes.
1. All or a portion of the security position is when-issued or delayed delivery to be delivered and settled after period end. See Note 4 of the accompanying Notes.
2. Denotes a step bond: a zero coupon bond that converts to a fixed or variable interest rate at a designated future date.
3. This security is accruing partial income at an anticipated effective rate based on expected interest and/or principal payments. The rate shown is the contractual interest rate.
4. This security is not accruing income because the issuer has missed an interest payment on it and/or is not anticipated to make future interest and or principal payments. The rate shown is the contractual interest rate. See Note 4 of the accompanying Notes.
5. Zero coupon bond reflects effective yield on the date of purchase.
6. Security represents the underlying municipal bond with respect to an inverse floating rate security held by the Fund. The bond was purchased by the Fund and subsequently transferred to a trust, which issued the related inverse floating rate security. See Note 4 of the accompanying Notes.
7. Interest or dividend is paid-in-kind, when applicable.
8. Represents the current interest rate for a variable or increasing rate security.
47 OPPENHEIMER ROCHESTER AMT-FREE MUNICIPAL FUND
STATEMENT OF INVESTMENTS Unaudited / Continued
Footnotes to Statement of Investments (Continued)
9. Subject to a forbearance agreement. Rate shown is the contractual interest rate. See Note 4 of the accompanying Notes.
10. Received as a result of a corporate action.
To simplify the listings of securities, abbreviations are used per the table below:
AHACHC | ARC/HDS Alamance Country Housing Corp. | |
AWCC | American Water Capital Corp. | |
BH&HCG | Bristol Hospital & Health Care Group | |
BHDF | Bristol Hospital Development Foundation | |
BHlthC | Bristol Health Care | |
BHosp | Bristol Hospital | |
CDA | Communities Devel. Authority | |
COP | Certificates of Participation | |
DA | Dormitory Authority | |
EDA | Economic Devel. Authority | |
EDC | Economic Devel. Corp. | |
EF&CD | Environmental Facilities and Community Devel. | |
EPBH | Emma Pendleton Bradley Hospital | |
GO | General Obligation | |
H&EFA | Health and Educational Facilities Authority | |
H&EFB | Health and Educational Facilities Board | |
H&HEFA | Hospitals and Higher Education Facilities Authority | |
HDC | Housing Devel. Corp. | |
HE&HFA | Higher Education and Health Facilities Authority | |
HEFA | Higher Education Facilities Authority | |
HEFFA | Higher Educational Facilities Finance Authority | |
HFA | Housing Finance Agency | |
HFC | Housing Finance Corp. | |
HHH&H | Healthalliance Home Health & Hospital | |
HHosp | Healthalliance Hospital | |
IDA | Industrial Devel. Agency | |
ITEMECF | Industrial, Tourist, Educational, Medical and Environmental Community Facilities | |
KAWC | Kentucky American Water Company | |
LCMAS | Little Company of Mary Ancillary Services Corp. | |
M-S-R | Modesto Irrigation District of the City of Santa Clara and the City of Redding | |
MTA | Metropolitan Transportation Authority | |
NYC | New York City | |
NYS | New York State | |
OLOLMC | Our Lady Of Lake Medical Center | |
OLOLRMC | Our Lady of Lourdes Regional Medical Center | |
PEMC | Providence Everett MEdical Center | |
PH&S | Providence Health & Services | |
PH&SO | Providence Health & Services-Oregon | |
PH&SW | Providence Health & Services-Washington | |
PHlth | Presence Health | |
PHlthC | Providence Health Care | |
PHN | Presence Health Network | |
PHP | Presence PRV Health | |
PHSSC | Providence Health System-Southern CA | |
PLC | Presence Life Connections | |
PPH | Presence PRV Health | |
PRC | Presence RHC Corporation | |
PRMC | Presence Resurrection Medical Center | |
PSFH | Presence Saint Francis Hospital |
48 OPPENHEIMER ROCHESTER AMT-FREE MUNICIPAL FUND
Abbreviations (Continued) | ||
PSJHC | Presence Saint Francis Hospital-Chicago | |
PSM&EMC | Presence Saints Mary and Elizabeth Medical Center | |
PSMMC | Providence St. Mary Medical Center | |
RIH | Rhode Island Hospital | |
SJHC | St. Joseph Hospital Corp. | |
SJHCN | St. Joseph Home Care Network | |
SJHE | St. Joseph Hospital of Eureka | |
SJHO | St. Joseph Hospital of Orange | |
SJHS | St. Joseph Health System | |
SPEARS | Short Puttable Exempt Adjustable Receipts | |
SPH&HSC | St. Patrick Hospital and Health Science Center | |
TASC | Tobacco Settlement Asset-Backed Bonds | |
TMH | The Miriam Hospital | |
UMHC | UMass Memorial Health Care | |
UMMC | UMass Memorial Medical Center |
See accompanying Notes to Financial Statements.
49 OPPENHEIMER ROCHESTER AMT-FREE MUNICIPAL FUND
STATEMENT OF ASSETS AND LIABILITIES January 29, 20161 Unaudited
| ||||
Assets | ||||
Investments, at value (cost $2,477,287,565)—see accompanying statement of investments | $ | 2,222,856,387 | ||
| ||||
Cash | 27,650,205 | |||
| ||||
Receivables and other assets: | ||||
Interest | 27,492,770 | |||
Investments sold (including $4,967,842 sold on a when-issued or delayed delivery basis) | 16,355,756 | |||
Shares of beneficial interest sold | 4,019,138 | |||
Other | 325,802 | |||
|
| |||
Total assets | 2,298,700,058 | |||
| ||||
Liabilities | ||||
Payables and other liabilities: | ||||
Payable for short-term floating rate notes issued (See Note 4) | 113,665,000 | |||
Investments purchased (including $29,688,524 purchased on a when-issued or delayed delivery basis) | 40,148,257 | |||
Dividends | 1,845,509 | |||
Shares of beneficial interest redeemed | 1,419,973 | |||
Distribution and service plan fees | 358,067 | |||
Trustees’ compensation | 251,302 | |||
Shareholder communications | 7,047 | |||
Other | 107,595 | |||
|
| |||
Total liabilities | 157,802,750 | |||
| ||||
Net Assets | $ | 2,140,897,308 | ||
|
| |||
| ||||
Composition of Net Assets | ||||
Par value of shares of beneficial interest | $ | 308,939 | ||
| ||||
Additional paid-in capital | 2,803,473,145 | |||
| ||||
Accumulated net investment income | 32,716,749 | |||
| ||||
Accumulated net realized loss on investments | (441,170,347) | |||
| ||||
Net unrealized depreciation on investments | (254,431,178) | |||
|
| |||
Net Assets | $ | 2,140,897,308 | ||
|
|
1. January 29, 2016 represents the last business day of the Fund’s reporting period. See Note 2 of the accompanying Notes.
50 OPPENHEIMER ROCHESTER AMT-FREE MUNICIPAL FUND
STATEMENT OF ASSETS AND LIABILITIES Unaudited / Continued
| ||||
Net Asset Value Per Share | ||||
Class A Shares: | ||||
Net asset value and redemption price per share (based on net assets of $1,283,166,896 and 184,792,541 shares of beneficial interest outstanding) | $ | 6.94 | ||
Maximum offering price per share (net asset value plus sales charge of 4.75% of offering price) | $ | 7.29 | ||
| ||||
Class B Shares: | ||||
Net asset value, redemption price (excludes applicable contingent deferred sales charge) and offering price per share (based on net assets of $8,687,317 and 1,259,572 shares of beneficial interest outstanding) | $ | 6.90 | ||
| ||||
Class C Shares: | ||||
Net asset value, redemption price (excludes applicable contingent deferred sales charge) and offering price per share (based on net assets of $402,640,521 and 58,412,275 shares of beneficial interest outstanding) | $ | 6.89 | ||
| ||||
Class Y Shares: | ||||
Net asset value, redemption price and offering price per share (based on net assets of $446,402,574 and 64,474,419 shares of beneficial interest outstanding) | $ | 6.92 |
See accompanying Notes to Financial Statements.
51 OPPENHEIMER ROCHESTER AMT-FREE MUNICIPAL FUND
STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS For the Six Months Ended January 29, 20161 Unaudited
| ||||
Investment Income | ||||
Interest | $ | 64,478,789 | ||
| ||||
Expenses | ||||
Management fees | 4,175,724 | |||
| ||||
Distribution and service plan fees: | ||||
Class A | 1,507,652 | |||
Class B | 48,970 | |||
Class C | 1,910,334 | |||
| ||||
Transfer and shareholder servicing agent fees: | ||||
Class A | 624,255 | |||
Class B | 4,899 | |||
Class C | 191,113 | |||
Class Y | 177,442 | |||
| ||||
Shareholder communications: | ||||
Class A | 11,424 | |||
Class B | 182 | |||
Class C | 4,393 | |||
Class Y | 1,690 | |||
| ||||
Interest expense and fees on short-term floating rate notes issued (See Note 4) | 657,840 | |||
| ||||
Borrowing fees | 641,213 | |||
| ||||
Legal, auditing and other professional fees | 412,441 | |||
| ||||
Trustees’ compensation | 16,356 | |||
| ||||
Custodian fees and expenses | 7,181 | |||
| ||||
Interest expense on borrowings | 481 | |||
| ||||
Other | 309,794 | |||
|
| |||
Total expenses | 10,703,384 | |||
| ||||
Net Investment Income | 53,775,405 | |||
| ||||
Realized and Unrealized Gain | ||||
Net realized gain on investments | 10,336,005 | |||
| ||||
Net change in unrealized appreciation/depreciation on investments | 48,212,005 | |||
| ||||
Net Increase in Net Assets Resulting from Operations | $ | 112,323,415 | ||
|
|
1. January 29, 2016 represents the last business day of the Fund’s reporting period. See Note 2 of the accompanying Notes.
See accompanying Notes to Financial Statements.
52 OPPENHEIMER ROCHESTER AMT-FREE MUNICIPAL FUND
STATEMENTS OF CHANGES IN NET ASSETS
Six Months Ended January 29, 20161 (Unaudited) | Year Ended July 31, 2015 | |||||||
| ||||||||
Operations | ||||||||
Net investment income | $ | 53,775,405 | $ | 118,354,813 | ||||
| ||||||||
Net realized gain | 10,336,005 | 24,102,368 | ||||||
| ||||||||
Net change in unrealized appreciation/depreciation | 48,212,005 | (50,019,374) | ||||||
|
|
|
| |||||
Net increase in net assets resulting from operations | 112,323,415 | 92,437,807 | ||||||
| ||||||||
Dividends and/or Distributions to Shareholders | ||||||||
Dividends from net investment income: | ||||||||
Class A | (38,135,574) | (77,890,915) | ||||||
Class B | (264,464) | (864,509) | ||||||
Class C | (10,316,247) | (19,876,745) | ||||||
Class Y | (11,263,562) | (18,328,094) | ||||||
|
| |||||||
(59,979,847) | (116,960,263) | |||||||
| ||||||||
Beneficial Interest Transactions | ||||||||
Net increase (decrease) in net assets resulting from beneficial interest transactions: | ||||||||
Class A | 12,162,477 | (52,378,817) | ||||||
Class B | (3,730,548) | (7,230,685) | ||||||
Class C | 19,488,136 | 3,882,360 | ||||||
Class Y | 161,469,120 | 31,678,418 | ||||||
|
|
|
| |||||
189,389,185 | (24,048,724) | |||||||
| ||||||||
Net Assets | ||||||||
Total increase (decrease) | 241,732,753 | (48,571,180) | ||||||
| ||||||||
Beginning of period | 1,899,164,555 | 1,947,735,735 | ||||||
|
|
|
| |||||
End of period (including accumulated net investment income of $32,716,749 and $38,921,191, respectively) | $ | 2,140,897,308 | $ | 1,899,164,555 | ||||
|
|
1. January 29, 2016 represents the last business day of the Fund’s reporting period. See Note 2 of the accompanying Notes.
See accompanying Notes to Financial Statements.
53 OPPENHEIMER ROCHESTER AMT-FREE MUNICIPAL FUND
STATEMENT OF CASH FLOWS For the Six Months Ended January 29, 20161 Unaudited
| ||||
Cash Flows from Operating Activities | ||||
Net increase in net assets from operations | $ | 112,323,415 | ||
| ||||
Adjustments to reconcile net increase in net assets from operations to net cash used in operating activities: | ||||
Purchase of investment securities | (319,240,464) | |||
Proceeds from disposition of investment securities | 142,468,980 | |||
Short-term investment securities, net | 5,690,432 | |||
Premium amortization | 4,593,383 | |||
Discount accretion | (14,969,125) | |||
Net realized gain on investments | (10,336,005) | |||
Net change in unrealized appreciation/depreciation on investments | (48,212,005) | |||
Change in assets: | ||||
Decrease in other assets | 312,799 | |||
Increase in interest receivable | (159,135) | |||
Increase in receivable for securities sold | (12,560,703) | |||
Change in liabilities: | ||||
Decrease in other liabilities | (99,266) | |||
Increase in payable for securities purchased | 40,148,257 | |||
|
| |||
Net cash used in operating activities | (100,039,437) | |||
| ||||
Cash Flows from Financing Activities | ||||
Proceeds from borrowings | 14,100,000 | |||
Payments on borrowings | (14,100,000) | |||
Payments on short-term floating rate notes issued | (33,625,000) | |||
Proceeds from shares sold | 416,231,961 | |||
Payments on shares redeemed | (262,217,236) | |||
Cash distributions paid | (11,908,641) | |||
|
| |||
Net cash provided by financing activities | 108,481,084 | |||
| ||||
Net increase in cash | 8,4 41,647 | |||
| ||||
Cash, beginning balance | 19,208,558 | |||
|
| |||
Cash, ending balance | $ | 27,650,205 | ||
|
|
Supplemental disclosure of cash flow information:
Noncash financing activities not included herein consist of reinvestment of dividends and distributions of $47,941,402.
Cash paid for interest on borrowings—$1,555.
Cash paid for interest on short-term floating rate notes issued—$657,840.
1. January 29, 2016 represents the last business day of the Fund’s reporting period. See Note 2 of the accompanying Notes.
See accompanying Notes to Financial Statements.
54 OPPENHEIMER ROCHESTER AMT-FREE MUNICIPAL FUND
Class A | Six Months Ended January 29, 20161 (Unaudited) | Year Ended 2015 | Year Ended 2014 | Year Ended 2013 | Year Ended 2012 | Year Ended 20111 | ||||||
| ||||||||||||
Per Share Operating Data | ||||||||||||
Net asset value, beginning of period | $6.76 | $6.84 | $6.65 | $7.19 | $6.27 | $6.39 | ||||||
| ||||||||||||
Income (loss) from investment operations: | ||||||||||||
Net investment income2 | 0.19 | 0.42 | 0.43 | 0.40 | 0.43 | 0.46 | ||||||
Net realized and unrealized gain (loss) | 0.20 | (0.08) | 0.16 | (0.55) | 0.90 | (0.17) | ||||||
| ||||||||||||
Total from investment operations | 0.39 | 0.34 | 0.59 | (0.15) | 1.33 | 0.29 | ||||||
| ||||||||||||
Dividends and/or distributions to shareholders: | ||||||||||||
Dividends from net investment income | (0.21) | (0.42) | (0.40) | (0.39) | (0.41) | (0.41) | ||||||
| ||||||||||||
Net asset value, end of period | $6.94 | $6.76 | $6.84 | $6.65 | $7.19 | $6.27 | ||||||
| ||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||
Total Return, at Net Asset Value3 | 5.81% | 4.88% | 9.18% | (2.32)% | 21.90% | 4.97% | ||||||
| ||||||||||||
Ratios/Supplemental Data | ||||||||||||
Net assets, end of period (in thousands) | $1,283,167 | $1,237,668 | $1,305,586 | $1,586,019 | $1,888,870 | $1,619,244 | ||||||
| ||||||||||||
Average net assets (in thousands) | $1,255,691 | $1,306,597 | $1,405,201 | $1,914,142 | $1,677,433 | $1,779,808 | ||||||
| ||||||||||||
Ratios to average net assets:4 | ||||||||||||
Net investment income | 5.44% | 6.04% | 6.40% | 5.52% | 6.45% | 7.39% | ||||||
Expenses excluding interest and fees on short-term floating rate notes issued and interest and fees from borrowings | 0.83% | 0.87% | 0.82% | 0.74% | 0.77% | 0.74% | ||||||
Interest and fees from borrowings | 0.06% | 0.09% | 0.09% | 0.08% | 0.10% | 0.13% | ||||||
Interest and fees on short-term floating rate notes issued5 | 0.07% | 0.08% | 0.17% | 0.10% | 0.17% | 0.21% | ||||||
| ||||||||||||
Total expenses | 0.96% | 1.04% | 1.08% | 0.92% | 1.04% | 1.08% | ||||||
Expenses after payments, waivers and/or reimbursements and reduction to custodian expenses | 0.96% | 1.04% | 1.08% | 0.92% | 1.04% | 1.08% | ||||||
| ||||||||||||
Portfolio turnover rate | 7% | 9% | 10% | 13% | 21% | 30% |
1. January 29, 2016 and July 29, 2011 represent the last business days of the Fund’s respective reporting periods. See Note 2 of the accompanying Notes.
2. Per share amounts calculated based on the average shares outstanding during the period.
3. Assumes an initial investment on the business day before the first day of the fiscal period, with all dividends and distributions reinvested in additional shares on the reinvestment date, and redemption at the net asset value calculated on the last business day of the fiscal period. Sales charges are not reflected in the total returns. Total returns are not annualized for periods less than one full year. Returns do not reflect the deduction of taxes that a shareholder would pay on fund distributions or the redemption of fund shares.
4. Annualized for periods less than one full year.
5. Interest and fee expense relates to the Fund’s liability for short-term floating rate notes issued in conjunction with inverse floating rate security transactions.
See accompanying Notes to Financial Statements.
55 OPPENHEIMER ROCHESTER AMT-FREE MUNICIPAL FUND
FINANCIAL HIGHLIGHTS Continued
Class B | Six Months Ended January 29, 20161 (Unaudited) | Year Ended July 31, 2015 | Year Ended July 31, 2014 | Year Ended July 31, 2013 | Year Ended July 31, 2012 | Year Ended July 29, 20111 | ||||||
| ||||||||||||
Per Share Operating Data | ||||||||||||
Net asset value, beginning of period | $6.72 | $6.80 | $6.61 | $7.15 | $6.24 | $6.36 | ||||||
| ||||||||||||
Income (loss) from investment operations: | ||||||||||||
Net investment income2 | 0.16 | 0.37 | 0.37 | 0.34 | 0.37 | 0.40 | ||||||
Net realized and unrealized gain (loss) | 0.20 | (0.09) | 0.17 | (0.55) | 0.89 | (0.16) | ||||||
| ||||||||||||
Total from investment operations | 0.36 | 0.28 | 0.54 | (0.21) | 1.26 | 0.24 | ||||||
| ||||||||||||
Dividends and/or distributions to shareholders: | ||||||||||||
Dividends from net investment income | (0.18) | (0.36) | (0.35) | (0.33) | (0.35) | (0.36) | ||||||
| ||||||||||||
Net asset value, end of period | $6.90 | $6.72 | $6.80 | $6.61 | $7.15 | $6.24 | ||||||
| ||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||
Total Return, at Net Asset Value3 | 5.45% | 4.12% | 8.39% | (3.15)% | 20.84% | 4.11% | ||||||
| ||||||||||||
Ratios/Supplemental Data | ||||||||||||
Net assets, end of period (in thousands) | $8,687 | $12,148 | $19,426 | $26,593 | $36,439 | $34,889 | ||||||
| ||||||||||||
Average net assets (in thousands) | $9,852 | $16,554 | $22,337 | $33,430 | $34,260 | $37,308 | ||||||
| ||||||||||||
Ratios to average net assets:4 | ||||||||||||
Net investment income | 4.71% | 5.30% | 5.61% | 4.69% | 5.62% | 6.54% | ||||||
Expenses excluding interest and fees on short-term floating rate notes issued and interest and fees from borrowings | 1.58% | 1.63% | 1.61% | 1.57% | 1.61% | 1.60% | ||||||
Interest and fees from borrowings | 0.06% | 0.09% | 0.09% | 0.08% | 0.10% | 0.13% | ||||||
Interest and fees on short-term floating rate notes issued5 | 0.07% | 0.08% | 0.17% | 0.10% | 0.17% | 0.21% | ||||||
| ||||||||||||
Total expenses | 1.71% | 1.80% | 1.87% | 1.75% | 1.88% | 1.94% | ||||||
Expenses after payments, waivers and/or reimbursements and reduction to custodian expenses | 1.71% | 1.80% | 1.87% | 1.75% | 1.88% | 1.94% | ||||||
| ||||||||||||
Portfolio turnover rate | 7% | 9% | 10% | 13% | 21% | 30% |
1. January 29, 2016 and July 29, 2011 represent the last business days of the Fund’s respective reporting periods. See Note 2 of the accompanying Notes.
2. Per share amounts calculated based on the average shares outstanding during the period.
3. Assumes an initial investment on the business day before the first day of the fiscal period, with all dividends and distributions reinvested in additional shares on the reinvestment date, and redemption at the net asset value calculated on the last business day of the fiscal period. Sales charges are not reflected in the total returns. Total returns are not annualized for periods less than one full year. Returns do not reflect the deduction of taxes that a shareholder would pay on fund distributions or the redemption of fund shares.
4. Annualized for periods less than one full year.
5. Interest and fee expense relates to the Fund’s liability for short-term floating rate notes issued in conjunction with inverse floating rate security transactions.
See accompanying Notes to Financial Statements.
56 OPPENHEIMER ROCHESTER AMT-FREE MUNICIPAL FUND
Class C | Six Months Ended January 29, 20161 (Unaudited) | Year Ended July 31, 2015 | Year Ended July 31, 2014 | Year Ended July 31, 2013 | Year Ended July 31, 2012 | Year Ended July 29, 20111 | ||||||
| ||||||||||||
Per Share Operating Data | ||||||||||||
Net asset value, beginning of period | $6.71 | $6.80 | $6.60 | $7.15 | $6.24 | $6.36 | ||||||
| ||||||||||||
Income (loss) from investment operations: | ||||||||||||
Net investment income2 | 0.16 | 0.37 | 0.37 | 0.34 | 0.38 | 0.40 | ||||||
Net realized and unrealized gain (loss) | 0.20 | (0.10) | 0.18 | (0.55) | 0.89 | (0.15) | ||||||
| ||||||||||||
Total from investment operations | 0.36 | 0.27 | 0.55 | (0.21) | 1.27 | 0.25 | ||||||
| ||||||||||||
Dividends and/or distributions to shareholders: | ||||||||||||
Dividends from net investment income | (0.18) | (0.36) | (0.35) | (0.34) | (0.36) | (0.37) | ||||||
| ||||||||||||
Net asset value, end of period | $6.89 | $6.71 | $6.80 | $6.60 | $7.15 | $6.24 | ||||||
| ||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||
Total Return, at Net Asset Value3 | 5.46% | 3.98% | 8.58% | (3.24)% | 20.91% | 4.18% | ||||||
| ||||||||||||
Ratios/Supplemental Data | ||||||||||||
Net assets, end of period (in thousands) | $402,640 | $373,089 | $374,108 | $450,498 | $527,392 | $418,638 | ||||||
| ||||||||||||
Average net assets (in thousands) | $384,379 | $379,042 | $381,177 | $539,108 | $454,431 | $455,782 | ||||||
| ||||||||||||
Ratios to average net assets:4 | ||||||||||||
Net investment income | 4.69% | 5.30% | 5.62% | 4.75% | 5.66% | 6.60% | ||||||
Expenses excluding interest and fees on short-term floating rate notes issued and interest and fees from borrowings | 1.58% | 1.63% | 1.59% | 1.51% | 1.55% | 1.53% | ||||||
Interest and fees from borrowings | 0.06% | 0.09% | 0.09% | 0.08% | 0.10% | 0.13% | ||||||
Interest and fees on short-term floating rate notes issued5 | 0.07% | 0.08% | 0.17% | 0.10% | 0.17% | 0.21% | ||||||
| ||||||||||||
Total expenses | 1.71% | 1.80% | 1.85% | 1.69% | 1.82% | 1.87% | ||||||
Expenses after payments, waivers and/or reimbursements and reduction to custodian expenses | 1.71% | 1.80% | 1.85% | 1.69% | 1.82% | 1.87% | ||||||
| ||||||||||||
Portfolio turnover rate | 7% | 9% | 10% | 13% | 21% | 30% |
1. January 29, 2016 and July 29, 2011 represent the last business days of the Fund’s respective reporting periods. See Note 2 of the accompanying Notes.
2. Per share amounts calculated based on the average shares outstanding during the period.
3. Assumes an initial investment on the business day before the first day of the fiscal period, with all dividends and distributions reinvested in additional shares on the reinvestment date, and redemption at the net asset value calculated on the last business day of the fiscal period. Sales charges are not reflected in the total returns. Total returns are not annualized for periods less than one full year. Returns do not reflect the deduction of taxes that a shareholder would pay on fund distributions or the redemption of fund shares.
4. Annualized for periods less than one full year.
5. Interest and fee expense relates to the Fund’s liability for short-term floating rate notes issued in conjunction with inverse floating rate security transactions.
See accompanying Notes to Financial Statements.
57 OPPENHEIMER ROCHESTER AMT-FREE MUNICIPAL FUND
FINANCIAL HIGHLIGHTS Continued
Class Y | Six Months Ended January 29, 20161 (Unaudited) | Year Ended July 31, 2015 | Year Ended July 31, 2014 | Year Ended July 31, 2013 | Year Ended July 31, 2012 | Period Ended July 29, 20111,2 | ||||||
| ||||||||||||
Per Share Operating Data | ||||||||||||
Net asset value, beginning of period | $6.74 | $6.82 | $6.63 | $7.17 | $6.26 | $6.19 | ||||||
| ||||||||||||
Income (loss) from investment operations: | ||||||||||||
Net investment income3 | 0.19 | 0.44 | 0.44 | 0.42 | 0.44 | 0.30 | ||||||
Net realized and unrealized gain (loss) | 0.21 | (0.09) | 0.16 | (0.55) | 0.89 | 0.05 | ||||||
| ||||||||||||
Total from investment operations | 0.40 | 0.35 | 0.60 | (0.13) | 1.33 | 0.35 | ||||||
| ||||||||||||
Dividends and/or distributions to shareholders: | ||||||||||||
Dividends from net investment income | (0.22) | (0.43) | (0.41) | (0.41) | (0.42) | (0.28) | ||||||
| ||||||||||||
Net asset value, end of period | $6.92 | $6.74 | $6.82 | $6.63 | $7.17 | $6.26 | ||||||
| ||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||
Total Return, at Net Asset Value4 | 5.96% | 5.16% | 9.47% | (2.11)% | 22.06% | 6.03% | ||||||
| ||||||||||||
Ratios/Supplemental Data | ||||||||||||
Net assets, end of period (in thousands) | $446,403 | $276,260 | $248,616 | $198,648 | $289,075 | $52,976 | ||||||
| ||||||||||||
Average net assets (in thousands) | $357,305 | $294,301 | $245,234 | $278,098 | $159,256 | $22,067 | ||||||
| ||||||||||||
Ratios to average net assets:5 | ||||||||||||
Net investment income | 5.64% | 6.30% | 6.59% | 5.75% | 6.55% | 7.47% | ||||||
Expenses excluding interest and fees on short-term floating rate notes issued and interest and fees from borrowings | 0.59% | 0.63% | 0.58% | 0.51% | 0.52% | 0.54% | ||||||
Interest and fees from borrowings | 0.06% | 0.09% | 0.09% | 0.08% | 0.10% | 0.10% | ||||||
Interest and fees on short-term floating rate notes issued6 | 0.07% | 0.08% | 0.17% | 0.10% | 0.17% | 0.21% | ||||||
| ||||||||||||
Total expenses | 0.72% | 0.80% | 0.84% | 0.69% | 0.79% | 0.85% | ||||||
Expenses after payments, waivers and/or reimbursements and reduction to custodian expenses | 0.72% | 0.80% | 0.84% | 0.69% | 0.79% | 0.85% | ||||||
| ||||||||||||
Portfolio turnover rate | 7% | 9% | 10% | 13% | 21% | 30% |
1. January 29, 2016 and July 29, 2011 represent the last business days of the Fund’s respective reporting periods. See Note 2 of the accompanying Notes.
2. For the period from November 29, 2010 (inception of offering) to July 29, 2011.
3. Per share amounts calculated based on the average shares outstanding during the period.
4. Assumes an initial investment on the business day before the first day of the fiscal period, with all dividends and distributions reinvested in additional shares on the reinvestment date, and redemption at the net asset value calculated on the last business day of the fiscal period. Sales charges are not reflected in the total returns. Total returns are not annualized for periods less than one full year. Returns do not reflect the deduction of taxes that a shareholder would pay on fund distributions or the redemption of fund shares.
5. Annualized for periods less than one full year.
6. Interest and fee expense relates to the Fund’s liability for short-term floating rate notes issued in conjunction with inverse floating rate security transactions.
See accompanying Notes to Financial Statements.
58 OPPENHEIMER ROCHESTER AMT-FREE MUNICIPAL FUND
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS January 29, 2016 Unaudited
1. Organization
Oppenheimer Rochester AMT-Free Municipal Fund (the “Fund”) is a diversified open-end management investment company registered under the Investment Company Act of 1940 (“1940 Act”), as amended. The Fund’s investment objective is to seek tax-free income. The Fund’s investment adviser is OFI Global Asset Management, Inc. (“OFI Global” or the “Manager”), a wholly-owned subsidiary of OppenheimerFunds, Inc. (“OFI” or the “Sub-Adviser”). The Manager has entered into a sub-advisory agreement with OFI.
The Fund offers Class A, Class C and Class Y shares, and previously offered Class B shares for new purchase through June 29, 2012. Subsequent to that date, no new purchases of Class B shares are permitted, however reinvestment of dividend and/or capital gain distributions and exchanges of Class B shares into and from other Oppenheimer funds are allowed. Class A shares are sold at their offering price, which is normally net asset value plus a front-end sales charge. Class C shares are sold, and Class B shares were sold, without a front-end sales charge but may be subject to a contingent deferred sales charge (“CDSC”). Class Y shares are sold to certain institutional investors or intermediaries without either a front-end sales charge or a CDSC, however, the intermediaries may impose charges on their accountholders who beneficially own Class Y shares. All classes of shares have identical rights and voting privileges with respect to the Fund in general and exclusive voting rights on matters that affect that class alone. Earnings, net assets and net asset value per share may differ due to each class having its own expenses, such as transfer and shareholder servicing agent fees and shareholder communications, directly attributable to that class. Class A, B and C shares have separate distribution and/or service plans under which they pay fees. Class Y shares do not pay such fees. Class B shares will automatically convert to Class A shares 72 months after the date of purchase.
The following is a summary of significant accounting policies followed in the Fund’s preparation of financial statements in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States (“U.S. GAAP”).
2. Significant Accounting Policies
Security Valuation. All investments in securities are recorded at their estimated fair value, as described in Note 3.
Reporting Period End Date. The last day of the Fund’s reporting period is the last day the New York Stock Exchange was open for trading during the period. The Fund’s financial statements have been presented through that date to maintain consistency with the Fund’s net asset value calculations used for shareholder transactions.
Allocation of Income, Expenses, Gains and Losses. Income, expenses (other than those attributable to a specific class), gains and losses are allocated on a daily basis to each class of shares based upon the relative proportion of net assets represented by such class. Operating expenses directly attributable to a specific class are charged against the operations of that class.
59 OPPENHEIMER ROCHESTER AMT-FREE MUNICIPAL FUND
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS Unaudited / Continued
2. Significant Accounting Policies
Dividends and Distributions to Shareholders. Dividends and distributions to shareholders, which are determined in accordance with income tax regulations and may differ from U.S. GAAP, are recorded on the ex-dividend date. Income distributions, if any, are declared daily and paid monthly. Capital gain distributions, if any, are declared and paid annually.
The tax character of distributions is determined as of the Fund’s fiscal year end. Therefore, a portion of the Fund’s distributions made to shareholders prior to the Fund’s fiscal year end may ultimately be categorized as a tax return of capital.
Investment Income. Interest income is recognized on an accrual basis. Discount and premium, which are included in interest income on the Statement of Operations, are amortized or accreted daily.
Custodian Fees. “Custodian fees and expenses” in the Statement of Operations may include interest expense incurred by the Fund on any cash overdrafts of its custodian account during the period. Such cash overdrafts may result from the effects of failed trades in portfolio securities and from cash outflows resulting from unanticipated shareholder redemption activity. The Fund pays interest to its custodian on such cash overdraft at a rate equal to the Prime Rate plus 0.35%. The “Reduction to custodian expenses” line item, if applicable, represents earnings on cash balances maintained by the Fund during the period. Such interest expense and other custodian fees may be paid with these earnings.
Security Transactions. Security transactions are recorded on the trade date. Realized gains and losses on securities sold are determined on the basis of identified cost.
Indemnifications. The Fund’s organizational documents provide current and former Trustees and officers with a limited indemnification against liabilities arising in connection with the performance of their duties to the Fund. In the normal course of business, the Fund may also enter into contracts that provide general indemnifications. The Fund’s maximum exposure under these arrangements is unknown as this would be dependent on future claims that may be made against the Fund. The risk of material loss from such claims is considered remote.
Federal Taxes. The Fund intends to comply with provisions of the Internal Revenue Code applicable to regulated investment companies and to distribute substantially all of its investment company taxable income to shareholders. Therefore, no federal income or excise tax provision is required. The Fund files income tax returns in U.S. federal and applicable state jurisdictions. The statute of limitations on the Fund’s tax return filings generally remains open for the three preceding fiscal reporting period ends.
During the fiscal year ended July 31, 2015, the Fund utilized $19,146,835 of capital loss carryforward to offset capital gains realized in that fiscal year. Details of the fiscal year ended July 31, 2015 capital loss carryforwards are included in the table below. Capital loss
60 OPPENHEIMER ROCHESTER AMT-FREE MUNICIPAL FUND
2. Significant Accounting Policies
carryforwards with no expiration, if any, must be utilized prior to those with expiration dates. Capital losses with no expiration will be carried forward to future years if not offset by gains.
Expiring | ||||
| ||||
2016 | $ | 38,527,923 | ||
2017 | 105,610,446 | |||
2018 | 177,767,456 | |||
2019 | 12,340,869 | |||
No expiration | 115,119,139 | |||
|
| |||
Total | $ | 449,365,833 | ||
|
|
At period end, it is estimated that the capital loss carryforwards would be $334,246,694 expiring by 2019 and $104,783,134, which will not expire. The estimated capital loss carryforward represents the carryforward as of the end of the last fiscal year, increased or decreased by capital losses or gains realized in the first six months of the current fiscal year. During the reporting period, it is estimated that the Fund will utilize $10,336,005 of capital loss carryforward to offset realized capital gains.
Net investment income (loss) and net realized gain (loss) may differ for financial statement and tax purposes. The character of dividends and distributions made during the fiscal year from net investment income or net realized gains are determined in accordance with federal income tax requirements, which may differ from the character of net investment income or net realized gains presented in those financial statements in accordance with U.S. GAAP. Also, due to timing of dividends and distributions, the fiscal year in which amounts are distributed may differ from the fiscal year in which the income or net realized gain was recorded by the Fund.
The aggregate cost of securities and other investments and the composition of unrealized appreciation and depreciation of securities and other investments for federal income tax purposes at period end are noted in the following table. The primary difference between book and tax appreciation or depreciation of securities and other investments, if applicable, is attributable to the tax deferral of losses or tax realization of financial statement unrealized gain or loss.
Federal tax cost of securities | $ | 2,366,372,622 1 | ||
|
| |||
Gross unrealized appreciation | $ | 157,511,746 | ||
Gross unrealized depreciation | (412,581,902) | |||
|
| |||
Net unrealized depreciation | $ | (255,070,156) | ||
|
|
1. The Federal tax cost of securities does not include cost of $111,553,921, which has otherwise been recognized for financial reporting purposes, related to bonds placed into trusts in conjunction with certain investment transactions. See the Inverse Floating Rate Securities note in Note 4.
Use of Estimates. The preparation of financial statements in conformity with U.S. GAAP requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the reported amounts of increases and decreases in net assets from operations during the reporting period. Actual results could differ from those estimates.
61 OPPENHEIMER ROCHESTER AMT-FREE MUNICIPAL FUND
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS Unaudited / Continued
3. Securities Valuation
The Fund calculates the net asset value of its shares as of the close of the New York Stock Exchange (the “Exchange”), normally 4:00 P.M. Eastern time, on each day the Exchange is open for trading, except in the case of a scheduled early closing of the Exchange, in which case the Fund will calculate net asset value of the shares as of the scheduled early closing time of the Exchange.
The Fund’s Board has adopted procedures for the valuation of the Fund’s securities and has delegated the day-to-day responsibility for valuation determinations under those procedures to the Manager. The Manager has established a Valuation Committee which is responsible for determining a “fair valuation” for any security for which market quotations are not “readily available.” The Valuation Committee’s fair valuation determinations are subject to review, approval and ratification by the Fund’s Board at its next regularly scheduled meeting covering the calendar quarter in which the fair valuation was determined.
Valuation Methods and Inputs
Securities are valued using unadjusted quoted market prices, when available, as supplied primarily by third party pricing services or dealers.
The following methodologies are used to determine the market value or the fair value of the types of securities described below:
Securities traded on a registered U.S. securities exchange (including exchange-traded derivatives other than futures and futures options) are valued based on the last sale price of the security reported on the principal exchange on which it is traded, prior to the time when the Fund’s assets are valued. In the absence of a sale, the security is valued at the mean between the bid and asked price on the principal exchange or, if not available from the principal exchange, obtained from two dealers. If bid and asked prices are not available from either the exchange or two dealers, the security is valued by using one of the following methodologies (listed in order of priority): (1) a bid from the principal exchange, (2) the mean between the bid and asked price as provided by a single dealer, or (3) a bid from a single dealer. A security of a foreign issuer traded on a foreign exchange, but not listed on a registered U.S. securities exchange, is valued based on the last sale price on the principal exchange on which the security is traded, as identified by the third party pricing service used by the Manager, prior to the time when the Fund’s assets are valued. If the last sale price is unavailable, the security is valued at the most recent official closing price on the principal exchange on which it is traded. If the last sales price or official closing price for a foreign security is not available, the security is valued at the mean between the bid and asked price per the exchange or, if not available from the exchange, obtained from two dealers. If bid and asked prices are not available from either the exchange or two dealers, the security is valued by using one of the following methodologies (listed in order of priority): (1) a bid from the exchange, (2) the mean between the bid and asked price as provided by a single dealer, or (3) a bid from a single dealer.
Shares of a registered investment company that are not traded on an exchange are valued at that investment company’s net asset value per share.
Corporate and government debt securities (of U.S. or foreign issuers) and municipal debt securities, event-linked bonds, loans, mortgage-backed securities, collateralized mortgage
62 OPPENHEIMER ROCHESTER AMT-FREE MUNICIPAL FUND
3. Securities Valuation (Continued)
obligations, and asset-backed securities are valued at the mean between the “bid” and “asked” prices utilizing evaluated prices obtained from third party pricing services or broker-dealers who may use matrix pricing methods to determine the evaluated prices.
Short-term money market type debt securities with a remaining maturity of sixty days or less are valued at cost adjusted by the amortization of discount or premium to maturity (amortized cost), which approximates market value. Short-term debt securities with a remaining maturity in excess of sixty days are valued at the mean between the “bid” and “asked” prices utilizing evaluated prices obtained from third party pricing services or broker-dealers.
A description of the standard inputs that may generally be considered by the third party pricing vendors in determining their evaluated prices is provided below.
Security Type | Standard inputs generally considered by third-party pricing vendors | |
| ||
Corporate debt, government debt, municipal, mortgage-backed and asset-backed securities | Reported trade data, broker-dealer price quotations, benchmark yields, issuer spreads on comparable securities, the credit quality, yield, maturity, and other appropriate factors. | |
| ||
Loans | Information obtained from market participants regarding reported trade data and broker-dealer price quotations. | |
| ||
Event-linked bonds | Information obtained from market participants regarding reported trade data and broker-dealer price quotations. |
If a market value or price cannot be determined for a security using the methodologies described above, or if, in the “good faith” opinion of the Manager, the market value or price obtained does not constitute a “readily available market quotation,” or a significant event has occurred that would materially affect the value of the security, the security is fair valued either (i) by a standardized fair valuation methodology applicable to the security type or the significant event as previously approved by the Valuation Committee and the Fund’s Board or (ii) as determined in good faith by the Manager’s Valuation Committee. The Valuation Committee considers all relevant facts that are reasonably available, through either public information or information available to the Manager, when determining the fair value of a security. Fair value determinations by the Manager are subject to review, approval and ratification by the Fund’s Board at its next regularly scheduled meeting covering the calendar quarter in which the fair valuation was determined. Those fair valuation standardized methodologies include, but are not limited to, valuing securities at the last sale price or initially at cost and subsequently adjusting the value based on: changes in company specific fundamentals, changes in an appropriate securities index, or changes in the value of similar securities which may be further adjusted for any discounts related to security-specific resale restrictions. When possible, such methodologies use observable market inputs such as unadjusted quoted prices of similar securities, observable interest rates, currency rates and yield curves. The methodologies used for valuing securities are not necessarily an indication of the risks associated with investing in those securities nor can it be assured that the Fund can obtain the fair value assigned to a security if it were to sell the security.
To assess the continuing appropriateness of security valuations, the Manager, or its third party service provider who is subject to oversight by the Manager, regularly compares prior
63 OPPENHEIMER ROCHESTER AMT-FREE MUNICIPAL FUND
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS Unaudited / Continued
3. Securities Valuation (Continued)
day prices, prices on comparable securities, and sale prices to the current day prices and challenges those prices exceeding certain tolerance levels with the third party pricing service or broker source. For those securities valued by fair valuations, whether through a standardized fair valuation methodology or a fair valuation determination, the Valuation Committee reviews and affirms the reasonableness of the valuations based on such methodologies and fair valuation determinations on a regular basis after considering all relevant information that is reasonably available.
Classifications
Each investment asset or liability of the Fund is assigned a level at measurement date based on the significance and source of the inputs to its valuation. Various data inputs are used in determining the value of each of the Fund’s investments as of the reporting period end. These data inputs are categorized in the following hierarchy under applicable financial accounting standards:
1) Level 1-unadjusted quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities (including securities actively traded on a securities exchange)
2) Level 2-inputs other than unadjusted quoted prices that are observable for the asset or liability (such as unadjusted quoted prices for similar assets and market corroborated inputs such as interest rates, prepayment speeds, credit risks, etc.)
3) Level 3-significant unobservable inputs (including the Manager’s own judgments about assumptions that market participants would use in pricing the asset or liability).
The inputs used for valuing securities are not necessarily an indication of the risks associated with investing in those securities.
The table below categorizes amounts that are included in the Fund’s Statement of Assets and Liabilities at period end based on valuation input level:
Level 1— Unadjusted Quoted Prices | Level 2— Other Significant Observable Inputs | Level 3— Significant Unobservable Inputs | Value | |||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||
Assets Table | ||||||||||||||||
Investments, at Value: | ||||||||||||||||
Municipal Bonds and Notes | ||||||||||||||||
Alabama | $ | — | $ | 86,603,701 | $ | — | $ | 86,603,701 | ||||||||
Alaska | — | 426,395 | — | 426,395 | ||||||||||||
Arizona | — | 51,540,158 | — | 51,540,158 | ||||||||||||
Arkansas | — | — | 1,112,538 | 1,112,538 | ||||||||||||
California | — | 284,538,011 | — | 284,538,011 | ||||||||||||
Colorado | — | 24,408,737 | — | 24,408,737 | ||||||||||||
Connecticut | — | 832,062 | — | 832,062 | ||||||||||||
Delaware | — | 4,973,635 | — | 4,973,635 | ||||||||||||
District of Columbia | — | 21,906,349 | — | 21,906,349 | ||||||||||||
Florida | — | 229,537,575 | 815,872 | 230,353,447 | ||||||||||||
Georgia | — | 7,960,791 | — | 7,960,791 | ||||||||||||
Idaho | — | 1,142,739 | — | 1,142,739 | ||||||||||||
Illinois | — | 228,676,040 | — | 228,676,040 | ||||||||||||
Indiana | — | 38,388,188 | — | 38,388,188 |
64 OPPENHEIMER ROCHESTER AMT-FREE MUNICIPAL FUND
3. Securities Valuation (Continued)
Level 1— Unadjusted Quoted Prices | Level 2— Other Significant Observable Inputs | Level 3— Significant Unobservable Inputs | Value | |||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||
Municipal Bonds and Notes (Continued) | ||||||||||||||||
Iowa | $ | — | $ | 3,131,377 | $ | — | $ | 3,131,377 | ||||||||
Kansas | — | 2,954,977 | — | 2,954,977 | ||||||||||||
Kentucky | — | 19,365,329 | — | 19,365,329 | ||||||||||||
Louisiana | — | 64,346,934 | — | 64,346,934 | ||||||||||||
Maine | — | 8,299,830 | — | 8,299,830 | ||||||||||||
Maryland | — | 3,253,644 | — | 3,253,644 | ||||||||||||
Massachusetts | — | 12,472,108 | 5,758 | 12,477,866 | ||||||||||||
Michigan | — | 97,596,239 | — | 97,596,239 | ||||||||||||
Minnesota | — | 2,021,370 | — | 2,021,370 | ||||||||||||
Mississippi | — | 1,057,663 | — | 1,057,663 | ||||||||||||
Missouri | — | 45,628,001 | — | 45,628,001 | ||||||||||||
Montana | — | 4,478,483 | — | 4,478,483 | ||||||||||||
Nebraska | — | 16,989,469 | — | 16,989,469 | ||||||||||||
Nevada | — | 15,633,350 | — | 15,633,350 | ||||||||||||
New Hampshire | — | 60,178,175 | — | 60,178,175 | ||||||||||||
New Jersey | — | 51,555,532 | — | 51,555,532 | ||||||||||||
New Mexico | — | 2,412,775 | — | 2,412,775 | ||||||||||||
New York | — | 91,395,791 | — | 91,395,791 | ||||||||||||
North Carolina | — | 20,055 | — | 20,055 | ||||||||||||
North Dakota | — | 6,654,455 | — | 6,654,455 | ||||||||||||
Ohio | — | 172,583,236 | — | 172,583,236 | ||||||||||||
Oklahoma | — | 13,575,425 | �� | — | 13,575,425 | |||||||||||
Oregon | — | 3,472,603 | — | 3,472,603 | ||||||||||||
Pennsylvania | — | 59,867,112 | — | 59,867,112 | ||||||||||||
Rhode Island | — | 18,780,983 | — | 18,780,983 | ||||||||||||
South Carolina | — | 16,509,975 | 4,844,550 | 21,354,525 | ||||||||||||
South Dakota | — | 1,721,265 | — | 1,721,265 | ||||||||||||
Tennessee | — | 7,537,836 | — | 7,537,836 | ||||||||||||
Texas | — | 100,316,923 | — | 100,316,923 | ||||||||||||
Utah | — | 276,963 | — | 276,963 | ||||||||||||
Vermont | — | 1,218,191 | — | 1,218,191 | ||||||||||||
Virginia | — | 18,957,678 | 1,030,366 | 19,988,044 | ||||||||||||
Washington | — | 67,228,192 | — | 67,228,192 | ||||||||||||
West Virginia | — | 4,246,536 | — | 4,246,536 | ||||||||||||
Wisconsin | — | 32,484,362 | 2 | 32,484,364 | ||||||||||||
U.S. Possessions | — | 205,886,689 | — | 205,886,689 | ||||||||||||
Corporate Bonds and Notes | — | 3,394 | — | 3,394 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
Total Assets | $ | — | $ | 2,215,047,301 | $ | 7,809,086 | $ | 2,222,856,387 | ||||||||
|
|
Forward currency exchange contracts and futures contracts, if any, are reported at their unrealized appreciation/depreciation at measurement date, which represents the change in the contract’s value from trade date. All additional assets and liabilities included in the above table are reported at their market value at measurement date.
The table below shows the transfers between Level 2 and Level 3. The Fund’s policy is to recognize transfers in and transfers out as of the beginning of the reporting period.
65 OPPENHEIMER ROCHESTER AMT-FREE MUNICIPAL FUND
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS Unaudited / Continued
3. Securities Valuation (Continued)
Transfers into Level 2* | Transfers out of Level 3* | |||||||
| ||||||||
Assets Table | ||||||||
Investments, at Value: | ||||||||
Municipal Bonds and Notes | ||||||||
Florida | $ | 2,751,496 | $ | (2,751,496) | ||||
Montana | 8,740,461 | (8,740,461) | ||||||
Corporate Bonds and Notes | 3,395 | (3,395) | ||||||
|
| |||||||
Total Assets | $ | 11,495,352 | $ | (11,495,352) | ||||
|
|
*Transferred from Level 3 to Level 2 due to the availability of market data for this security.
4. Investments and Risks
Inverse Floating Rate Securities. The Fund invests in inverse floating rate securities that pay interest at a rate that varies inversely with short-term interest rates. Because inverse floating rate securities are leveraged instruments, the value of an inverse floating rate security will change more significantly in response to changes in interest rates and other market fluctuations than the market value of a conventional fixed-rate municipal security of similar maturity and credit quality, including the municipal bond underlying an inverse floating rate security.
An inverse floating rate security is created as part of a financial transaction referred to as a “tender option bond” transaction. In most cases, in a tender option bond transaction the Fund sells a fixed-rate municipal bond (the “underlying municipal bond”) to a trust (the “Trust”). The Trust then issues and sells short-term floating rate securities with a fixed principal amount representing a senior interest in the underlying municipal bond to third parties and a residual, subordinate interest in the underlying municipal bond (referred to as an “inverse floating rate security”) to the Fund. The interest rate on the short-term floating rate securities resets periodically, usually weekly, to a prevailing market rate and holders of these securities are granted the option to tender their securities back to the Trust for repurchase at their principal amount plus accrued interest thereon (the “purchase price”) periodically, usually daily or weekly. A remarketing agent for the Trust is required to attempt to re-sell any tendered short-term floating rate securities to new investors for the purchase price. If the remarketing agent is unable to successfully re-sell the tendered short-term floating rate securities, a liquidity provider to the Trust must contribute cash to the Trust to ensure that the tendering holders receive the purchase price of their securities on the repurchase date.
Because holders of the short-term floating rate securities are granted the right to tender their securities to the Trust for repurchase at frequent intervals for the purchase price, with such payment effectively guaranteed by the liquidity provider, the securities generally bear short-term rates of interest commensurate with money market instruments. When interest is paid on the underlying municipal bond to the Trust, such proceeds are first used to pay the Trust’s administrative expenses and accrued interest to holders of the short-term floating rate securities, with any remaining amounts being paid to the Fund, as the holder of the inverse floating rate security. Accordingly, the amount of such interest on the underlying municipal bond paid to the Fund is inversely related the rate of interest on the short-term floating rate
66 OPPENHEIMER ROCHESTER AMT-FREE MUNICIPAL FUND
4. Investments and Risks (Continued)
securities. Additionally, because the principal amount of the short-term floating rate securities is fixed and is not adjusted in response to changes in the market value of the underlying municipal bond, any change in the market value of the underlying municipal bond is reflected entirely in a change to the value of the inverse floating rate security.
Typically, the terms of an inverse floating rate security grant certain rights to the Fund, as holder. For example, the Fund typically has the right upon request to require that the Trust compel a tender of the short-term floating rate securities to facilitate the Fund’s acquisition of the underlying municipal bond. Following such a request, the Fund pays the Trust the purchase price of the short-term floating rate securities and a specified portion of any market value gain on the underlying municipal bond since its deposit into the Trust, which the Trust uses to redeem the short-term floating rate securities. The Trust then distributes the underlying municipal bond to the Fund. Through the exercise of this right, the Fund can voluntarily terminate or “collapse” the Trust, terminate its investment in the related inverse floating rate security and obtain the underlying municipal bond. Additionally, the Fund also typically has the right to exchange with the Trust (i) a principal amount of short-term floating rate securities held by the Fund for a corresponding additional principal amount of the inverse floating rate security or (ii) a principal amount of the inverse floating rate security held by the Fund for a corresponding additional principal amount of short-term floating rate securities (which are typically then sold to other investors). Through the exercise of this right, the Fund may increase (or decrease) the principal amount of short-term floating rate securities outstanding, thereby increasing (or decreasing) the amount of leverage provided by the short-term floating rate securities to the Fund’s investment exposure to the underlying municipal bond.
The Fund’s investments in inverse floating rate securities involve certain risks. As short-term interest rates rise, an inverse floating rate security produces less current income (and, in extreme cases, may pay no income) and as short-term interest rates fall, an inverse floating rate security produces more current income. Thus, if short-term interest rates rise after the issuance of the inverse floating rate security, any yield advantage is reduced or eliminated. All inverse floating rate securities entail some degree of leverage represented by the outstanding principal amount of the related short-term floating rate securities, relative to the par value of the underlying municipal bond. The value of, and income earned on, an inverse floating rate security that has a higher degree of leverage will fluctuate more significantly in response to changes in interest rates and to changes in the market value of the related underlying municipal bond than that of an inverse floating rate security with a lower degree of leverage, and is more likely to be eliminated entirely under adverse market conditions. Changes in the value of an inverse floating rate security will also be more significant than changes in the market value of the related underlying municipal bond because the leverage provided by the related short-term floating rate securities increases the sensitivity of an inverse floating rate security to changes in interest rates and to the market value of the underlying municipal bond. An inverse floating rate security can be expected to underperform fixed-rate municipal bonds when the difference between long-term and short-term interest rates is decreasing (or is already small) or when long-term interest rates are rising, but can be expected to outperform fixed-rate municipal bonds when the difference between long-term and short-
67 OPPENHEIMER ROCHESTER AMT-FREE MUNICIPAL FUND
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS Unaudited / Continued
4. Investments and Risks (Continued)
term interest rates is increasing (or is already large) or when long-term interest rates are falling. Additionally, a tender option bond transaction typically provides for the automatic termination or “collapse” of a Trust upon the occurrence of certain adverse events, usually referred to as “mandatory tender events” or “tender option termination events.” These events may include, among others, a credit ratings downgrade of the underlying municipal bond below a specified level, a decrease in the market value of the underlying municipal bond below a specified amount, a bankruptcy of the liquidity provider or the inability of the remarketing agent to re-sell to new investors short-term floating rate securities that have been tendered for repurchase by holders thereof. Following the occurrence of such an event, the underlying municipal bond is generally sold for current market value and the proceeds distributed to holders of the short-term floating rate securities and inverse floating rate security, with the holder of the inverse floating rate security (the Fund) generally receiving the proceeds of such sale only after the holders of the short-term floating rate securities have received proceeds equal to the purchase price of their securities (and the liquidity provider is generally required to contribute cash to the Trust only in an amount sufficient to ensure that the holders of the short-term floating rate securities receive the purchase price of their securities in connection with such termination of the Trust). Following the occurrence of such events, the Fund could potentially lose the entire amount of its investment in the inverse floating rate security.
Finally, the Fund may enter into shortfall/reimbursement agreements with the liquidity provider of certain tender option bond transactions in connection with certain inverse floating rate securities held by the Fund. These agreements commit the Fund to reimburse the liquidity provider to the extent that the liquidity provider must provide cash to a Trust, including following the termination of a Trust resulting from the occurrence of a “mandatory tender event.” In connection with the occurrence of such an event and the termination of the Trust triggered thereby, the shortfall/reimbursement agreement will make the Fund liable for the amount of the negative difference, if any, between the liquidation value of the underlying municipal bond and the purchase price of the short-term floating rate securities issued by the Trust. Under the standard terms of a tender option bond transaction, absent such a shortfall/reimbursement agreement, the Fund, as holder of the inverse floating rate security, would not be required to make such a reimbursement payment to the liquidity provider. The Manager monitors the Fund’s potential exposure with respect to these agreements on a daily basis and intends to take action to terminate the Fund’s investment in related inverse floating rate securities, if it deems it appropriate to do so. At period end, the Fund’s maximum exposure under such agreements is estimated at $80,920,000.
When the Fund creates an inverse floating rate security in a tender option bond transaction by selling an underlying municipal bond to a Trust, the transaction is considered a secured borrowing for financial reporting purposes. As a result of such accounting treatment, the Fund includes the underlying municipal bond on its Statement of Investments and as an asset on its Statement of Assets and Liabilities (but does not separately include the related inverse floating rate security on either). The Fund also includes a liability on its Statement of Assets and Liabilities equal to the outstanding principal amount and accrued interest on the related short-term floating rate securities issued by the Trust. Interest on the underlying municipal
68 OPPENHEIMER ROCHESTER AMT-FREE MUNICIPAL FUND
4. Investments and Risks (Continued)
bond is recorded as investment income on the Fund’s Statement of Operations, while interest payable on the related short-term floating rate securities is recorded as interest expense. At period end, municipal bond holdings with a value of $184,799,311 shown on the Fund’s Statement of Investments are held by such Trusts and serve as the underlying municipal bonds for the related $113,665,000 in short-term floating rate securities issued and outstanding at that date.
At period end, the inverse floating rate securities associated with tender option bond transactions accounted for as secured borrowings were as follows:
Principal Amount | Inverse Floater1 | Coupon Rate2 | Maturity Date | Value | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
$ 3,480,000 | FL COP (Dept. of Management Services) Tender Option Bond Series 2015-XF0020 Trust | 12.349 % | 8/1/28 | $ 4,638,422 | ||||||||||||
4,000,000 | Greater Orlando, FL Aviation Authority Tender Option Bond Series 2015-XF2019 Trust3 | 15.487 | 10/1/32 | 6,351,680 | ||||||||||||
4,000,000 | Houston, TX Airport System Tender Option Bond Series 2015-XF0240 Trust3 | 17.387 | 7/1/39 | 5,631,520 | ||||||||||||
5,000,000 | IL Finance Authority (Northwestern Memorial Hospital/Northwestern Memorial Healthcare Obligated Group) Tender Option Bond Series 2015-XF0022 Trust | 18.871 | 8/15/39 | 8,306,200 | ||||||||||||
1,555,000 | IL Finance Authority Tender Option Bond Series 2015-XF2122 Trust3 | 15.920 | 5/15/29 | 2,018,266 | ||||||||||||
3,650,000 | MI Hospital Finance Authority Tender Option Bond Series 2015-XF2129 Trust3 | 19.560 | 12/1/23 | 5,807,588 | ||||||||||||
10,790,000 | NH H&EFA (LRG Healthcare) Tender Option Bond Series 2015-XF0037 Trust | 8.940 | 10/1/34 | 14,184,966 | ||||||||||||
5,215,000 | NH H&EFA Tender Option Bond Series 2015- XF2144 Trust3 | 22.572 | 4/1/38 | 9,619,380 | ||||||||||||
2,500,000 | Orange County, FL School Board Tender Option Bond Series 2015-XF2013 Trust3 | 16.925 | 8/1/34 | 3,652,300 | ||||||||||||
3,335,000 | San Francisco, CA City & County COP Tender Option Bond Series 2015-XF20333 | 11.742 | 10/1/33 | 4,814,473 | ||||||||||||
3,840,000 | Tarrant County, TX Cultural Education Facilities Finance Corp. ROLs3 | 18.848 | 11/15/29 | 6,109,516 | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
$ 71,134,311 | ||||||||||||||||
|
|
1. For a list of abbreviations used in the Inverse Floater table see the Portfolio Abbreviations table at the end of the Statement of Investments.
2. Represents the current interest rate for the inverse floating rate security.
3. Represents an inverse floating rate security that is subject to a shortfall/reimbursement agreement.
The Fund may also purchase an inverse floating rate security created as part of a tender option bond transaction not initiated by the Fund when a third party, such as a municipal issuer or financial institution, transfers an underlying municipal bond to a Trust. For financial reporting purposes, the Fund includes the inverse floating rate security related to such transaction on its Statement of Investments and as an asset on its Statement of Assets and Liabilities, and interest on the security is recorded as investment income on the Fund’s Statement of Operations.
The Fund may invest in inverse floating rate securities with any degree of leverage (as
69 OPPENHEIMER ROCHESTER AMT-FREE MUNICIPAL FUND
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS Unaudited / Continued
4. Investments and Risks (Continued)
measured by the outstanding principal amount of related short-term floating rate securities). However, the Fund may only expose up to 20% of its total assets to the effects of leverage from its investments in inverse floating rate securities. This limitation is measured by comparing the aggregate principal amount of the short-term floating rate securities that are related to the inverse floating rate securities held by the Fund to the total assets of the Fund. The Fund’s exposure to the effects of leverage from its investments in inverse floating rate securities amounts to $113,665,000 or 4.94% of its total assets at period end.
Securities on a When-Issued or Delayed Delivery Basis. The Fund may purchase securities on a “when-issued” basis, and may purchase or sell securities on a “delayed delivery” basis. “When-issued” or “delayed delivery” refers to securities whose terms and indenture are available and for which a market exists, but which are not available for immediate delivery. Delivery and payment for securities that have been purchased by the Fund on a when-issued basis normally takes place within six months and possibly as long as two years or more after the trade date. During this period, such securities do not earn interest, are subject to market fluctuation and may increase or decrease in value prior to their delivery. The purchase of securities on a when-issued basis may increase the volatility of the Fund’s net asset value to the extent the Fund executes such transactions while remaining substantially fully invested. When the Fund engages in when-issued or delayed delivery transactions, it relies on the buyer or seller, as the case may be, to complete the transaction. Their failure to do so may cause the Fund to lose the opportunity to obtain or dispose of the security at a price and yield it considers advantageous. The Fund may also sell securities that it purchased on a when-issued basis or forward commitment prior to settlement of the original purchase.
At period end, the Fund had purchased securities issued on a when-issued or delayed delivery basis and sold securities issued on a delayed delivery basis as follows:
When-Issued or Delayed Delivery Basis Transactions | ||||
| ||||
Purchased securities | $29,688,524 | |||
Sold securities | 4,967,842 |
Credit Risk. The Fund invests in high-yield, non-investment-grade bonds, which may be subject to a greater degree of credit risk. Credit risk relates to the ability of the issuer to meet interest or principal payments or both as they become due. The Fund may acquire securities that have missed an interest payment, and is not obligated to dispose of securities whose issuers or underlying obligors subsequently miss an interest payment. Information concerning securities not accruing interest at period end is as follows:
Cost | $ | 97,295,204 | ||
Market Value | $ | 36,027,140 | ||
Market Value as % of Net Assets | 1.68% |
70 OPPENHEIMER ROCHESTER AMT-FREE MUNICIPAL FUND
4. Investments and Risks (Continued)
The Fund has entered into forbearance agreements with certain obligors under which the Fund has agreed to temporarily forego receipt of the original principal or coupon interest rates. At period end, securities with an aggregate market value of $46,493,049, representing 2.17% of the Fund’s net assets, were subject to these forbearance agreements.
5. Market Risk Factors
The Fund’s investments in securities and/or financial derivatives may expose the fund to various market risk factors:
Commodity Risk. Commodity risk relates to the change in value of commodities or commodity indexes as they relate to increases or decreases in the commodities market. Commodities are physical assets that have tangible properties. Examples of these types of assets are crude oil, heating oil, metals, livestock, and agricultural products.
Credit Risk. Credit risk relates to the ability of the issuer of debt to meet interest and principal payments, or both, as they come due. In general, lower-grade, higher-yield debt securities are subject to credit risk to a greater extent than lower-yield, higher-quality securities.
Equity Risk. Equity risk relates to the change in value of equity securities as they relate to increases or decreases in the general market.
Foreign Exchange Rate Risk. Foreign exchange rate risk relates to the change in the U.S. dollar value of a security held that is denominated in a foreign currency. The U.S. dollar value of a foreign currency denominated security will decrease as the dollar appreciates against the currency, while the U.S. dollar value will increase as the dollar depreciates against the currency.
Interest Rate Risk. Interest rate risk refers to the fluctuations in value of fixed-income securities resulting from the inverse relationship between price and yield. For example, an increase in general interest rates will tend to reduce the market value of already issued fixed-income investments, and a decline in general interest rates will tend to increase their value. In addition, debt securities with longer maturities, which tend to have higher yields, are subject to potentially greater fluctuations in value from changes in interest rates than obligations with shorter maturities.
Volatility Risk. Volatility risk refers to the magnitude of the movement, but not the direction of the movement, in a financial instrument’s price over a defined time period. Large increases or decreases in a financial instrument’s price over a relative time period typically indicate greater volatility risk, while small increases or decreases in its price typically indicate lower volatility risk.
6. Shares of Beneficial Interest
The Fund has authorized an unlimited number of $0.001 par value shares of beneficial interest of each class. Transactions in shares of beneficial interest were as follows:
71 OPPENHEIMER ROCHESTER AMT-FREE MUNICIPAL FUND
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS Unaudited / Continued
6. Shares of Beneficial Interest (Continued)
Six Months Ended January 29, 20161 | Year Ended July 31, 2015 | |||||||||||||||
Shares | Amount | Shares | Amount | |||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||
Class A | ||||||||||||||||
Sold | 20,087,436 | $ | 138,415,837 | 34,058,444 | $ | 236,726,509 | ||||||||||
Dividends and/or distributions reinvested | 4,501,357 | 30,989,507 | 9,125,696 | 63,499,082 | ||||||||||||
Redeemed | (22,878,655 | ) | (157,242,867) | (50,958,542 | ) | (352,604,408) | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
Net increase (decrease) | 1,710,138 | $ | 12,162,477 | (7,774,402 | ) | $ | (52,378,817) | |||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||
Class B | ||||||||||||||||
Sold | 34,568 | $ | 237,356 | 15,231 | $ | 104,938 | ||||||||||
Dividends and/or distributions reinvested | 33,931 | 231,949 | 108,202 | 749,027 | ||||||||||||
Redeemed | (617,728 | ) | (4,199,853) | (1,171,981 | ) | (8,084,650) | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
Net decrease | (549,229 | ) | $ | (3,730,548) | (1,048,548 | ) | $ | (7,230,685) | ||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||
Class C | ||||||||||||||||
Sold | 5,934,802 | $ | 40,642,109 | 10,083,068 | $ | 69,349,611 | ||||||||||
Dividends and/or distributions reinvested | 1,120,289 | 7,658,531 | 2,131,066 | 14,725,937 | ||||||||||||
Redeemed | (4,225,709 | ) | (28,812,504) | (11,685,844 | ) | (80,193,188) | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
Net increase | 2,829,382 | $ | 19,488,136 | 528,290 | $ | 3,882,360 | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||
Class Y | ||||||||||||||||
Sold | 32,110,288 | $ | 220,663,011 | 17,014,260 | $ | 117,824,299 | ||||||||||
Dividends and/or distributions reinvested | 1,318,057 | 9,061,415 | 2,062,545 | 14,312,320 | ||||||||||||
Redeemed | (9,938,197 | ) | (68,255,306) | (14,537,326 | ) | (100,458,201) | ||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||||
Net increase | 23,490,148 | $ | 161,469,120 | 4,539,479 | $ | 31,678,418 | ||||||||||
|
|
1. January 29, 2016 represents the last business day of the Fund’s reporting period. See Note 2.
7. Purchases and Sales of Securities
The aggregate cost of purchases and proceeds from sales of securities, other than short-term obligations, for the reporting period were as follows:
Purchases | Sales | |||||||
| ||||||||
Investment securities | $ | 319,240,464 | $ | 142,468,980 |
8. Fees and Other Transactions with Affiliates
Management Fees. Under the investment advisory agreement, the Fund pays the Manager a management fee based on the daily net assets of the Fund at an annual rate as shown in the following table:
72 OPPENHEIMER ROCHESTER AMT-FREE MUNICIPAL FUND
8. Fees and Other Transactions with Affiliates (Continued)
Fee Schedule | ||||
| ||||
Up to $200 million | 0.60% | |||
Next $100 million | 0.55 | |||
Next $200 million | 0.50 | |||
Next $250 million | 0.45 | |||
Next $250 million | 0.40 | |||
Next $4 billion | 0.35 | |||
Over $5 billion | 0.33 |
The Fund’s effective management fee for the reporting period was 0.41% of average annual net assets before any applicable waivers.
Sub-Adviser Fees. The Manager has retained the Sub-Adviser to provide the day-to-day portfolio management of the Fund. Under the Sub-Advisory Agreement, the Manager pays the Sub-Adviser an annual fee in monthly installments, equal to a percentage of the investment management fee collected by the Manager from the Fund, which shall be calculated after any investment management fee waivers. The fee paid to the Sub-Adviser is paid by the Manager, not by the Fund.
Transfer Agent Fees. OFI Global (the “Transfer Agent”) serves as the transfer and shareholder servicing agent for the Fund. The Fund pays the Transfer Agent a fee based on annual net assets. Fees incurred and average net assets for each class with respect to these services are detailed in the Statement of Operations and Financial Highlights, respectively.
Sub-Transfer Agent Fees. The Transfer Agent has retained Shareholder Services, Inc., a wholly-owned subsidiary of OFI (the “Sub-Transfer Agent”), to provide the day-to-day transfer agent and shareholder servicing of the Fund. Under the Sub-Transfer Agency Agreement, the Transfer Agent pays the Sub-Transfer Agent an annual fee in monthly installments, equal to a percentage of the transfer agent fee collected by the Transfer Agent from the Fund, which shall be calculated after any applicable fee waivers. The fee paid to the Sub-Transfer Agent is paid by the Transfer Agent, not by the Fund.
Trustees’ Compensation. The Fund has adopted an unfunded retirement plan (the “Plan”) for the Fund’s Independent Trustees. Benefits are based on years of service and fees paid to each Trustee during their period of service. The Plan was frozen with respect to adding new participants effective December 31, 2006 (the “Freeze Date”) and existing Plan Participants as of the Freeze Date will continue to receive accrued benefits under the Plan. Active Independent Trustees as of the Freeze Date have each elected a distribution method with respect to their benefits under the Plan. During the reporting period, the Fund’s projected benefit obligations, payments to retired Trustees and accumulated liability were as follows:
Projected Benefit Obligations Increased | $ | — | ||
Payments Made to Retired Trustees | 17,076 | |||
Accumulated Liability as of January 29, 2016 | 117,571 |
73 OPPENHEIMER ROCHESTER AMT-FREE MUNICIPAL FUND
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS Unaudited / Continued
8. Fees and Other Transactions with Affiliates (Continued)
The Fund’s Board of Trustees (“Board”) has adopted a compensation deferral plan for Independent Trustees that enables Trustees to elect to defer receipt of all or a portion of the annual compensation they are entitled to receive from the Fund. For purposes of determining the amount owed to the Trustee under the plan, deferred amounts are treated as though equal dollar amounts had been invested in shares of the Fund or in other Oppenheimer funds selected by the Trustee. The Fund purchases shares of the funds selected for deferral by the Trustee in amounts equal to his or her deemed investment, resulting in a Fund asset equal to the deferred compensation liability. Such assets are included as a component of “Other” within the asset section of the Statement of Assets and Liabilities. Deferral of Trustees’ fees under the plan will not affect the net assets of the Fund and will not materially affect the Fund’s assets, liabilities or net investment income per share. Amounts will be deferred until distributed in accordance with the compensation deferral plan.
Distribution and Service Plan (12b-1) Fees. Under its General Distributor’s Agreement with the Fund, OppenheimerFunds Distributor, Inc. (the “Distributor”) acts as the Fund’s principal underwriter in the continuous public offering of the Fund’s classes of shares.
Service Plan for Class A Shares. The Fund has adopted a Service Plan (the “Plan”) for Class A shares pursuant to Rule 12b-1 under the 1940 Act. Under the Plan, the Fund reimburses the Distributor for a portion of its costs incurred for services provided to accounts that hold Class A shares. Reimbursement is made periodically at an annual rate of up to 0.25% of the daily net assets of Class A shares of the Fund. The Distributor currently uses all of those fees to pay dealers, brokers, banks and other financial institutions periodically for providing personal service and maintenance of accounts of their customers that hold Class A shares. Any unreimbursed expenses the Distributor incurs with respect to Class A shares in any fiscal year cannot be recovered in subsequent periods. Fees incurred by the Fund under the Plan are detailed in the Statement of Operations.
Distribution and Service Plans for Class B and Class C Shares. The Fund has adopted Distribution and Service Plans (the “Plans”) for Class B and Class C shares pursuant to Rule 12b-1 under the 1940 Act to compensate the Distributor for distributing those share classes, maintaining accounts and providing shareholder services. Under the Plans, the Fund pays the Distributor an annual asset-based sales charge of 0.75% on Class B and Class C shares’ daily net assets. The Fund also pays a service fee under the Plans at an annual rate of 0.25% of daily net assets. The Plans continue in effect from year to year only if the Fund’s Board of Trustees votes annually to approve their continuance at an in person meeting called for that purpose. Fees incurred by the Fund under the Plans are detailed in the Statement of Operations.
Sales Charges. Front-end sales charges and CDSC do not represent expenses of the Fund. They are deducted from the proceeds of sales of Fund shares prior to investment or from redemption proceeds prior to remittance, as applicable. The sales charges retained by the
74 OPPENHEIMER ROCHESTER AMT-FREE MUNICIPAL FUND
8. Fees and Other Transactions with Affiliates (Continued)
Distributor from the sale of shares and the CDSC retained by the Distributor on the redemption of shares is shown in the following table for the period indicated.
Six Months Ended | Class A Front-End | Class A Contingent Deferred Sales Charges Retained by Distributor | Class B Contingent Deferred Sales Charges Retained by Distributor | Class C Contingent Deferred Sales Charges Retained by Distributor | ||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||
January 29, 2016 | $68,569 | $15,594 | $8,539 | $6,439 |
9. Borrowings and Other Financing
Borrowings. The Fund can borrow money from banks in amounts up to one third of its total assets (including the amount borrowed) less all liabilities and indebtedness other than borrowings (meaning that the value of those assets must be at least 300% of the amount borrowed). The Fund can use those borrowings for investment-related purposes such as purchasing portfolio securities. The Fund also may borrow to meet redemption obligations or for temporary and emergency purposes. When the Fund invests borrowed money in portfolio securities, it is using a speculative investment technique known as leverage and changes in the value of the Fund’s investments will have a larger effect on its share price than if it did not borrow because of the effect of leverage.
The Fund can also use the borrowings for other investment-related purposes, including in connection with the Fund’s inverse floater investments as discussed in Note 4. The Fund may use the borrowings to reduce the leverage amount of, or unwind or “collapse” trusts that issued “inverse floaters” owned by the Fund, or in circumstances in which the Fund has entered into a shortfall and forbearance agreement with the sponsor of the inverse floater trust to meet the Fund’s obligation to reimburse the sponsor of the inverse floater for the difference between the liquidation value of the underlying bond and the amount due to holders of the short-term floating rate notes issued by the Trust. See the discussion in Note 4 (Inverse Floating Rate Securities) for additional information.
The Fund will pay interest and may pay other fees in connection with loans. If the Fund does borrow, it will be subject to greater expenses than funds that do not borrow. The interest on borrowed money and the other fees incurred in conjunction with loans are an expense that might reduce the Fund’s yield and return. Expenses incurred by the Fund with respect to interest on borrowings and commitment fees are disclosed separately or as other expenses on the Statement of Operations.
The Fund entered into a Revolving Credit and Security Agreement (the “Agreement”) with conduit lenders and Citibank N.A. which enables it to participate with certain other Oppenheimer funds in a committed, secured borrowing facility that permits borrowings of up to $2.5 billion, collectively, by the Oppenheimer Rochester Funds. To secure the loan, the Fund pledges investment securities in accordance with the terms of the Agreement. Securities held in collateralized accounts to cover these borrowings are noted in the Statement of Investments. Interest is charged to the Fund, based on its borrowings, at current commercial paper issuance rates (0.4783% at period end). The Fund pays additional fees monthly to its lender on its outstanding borrowings to manage and administer the facility and is allocated its
75 OPPENHEIMER ROCHESTER AMT-FREE MUNICIPAL FUND
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS Unaudited / Continued
9. Borrowings and Other Financing (Continued)
pro-rata share of an annual structuring fee and ongoing commitment fees both of which are based on the total facility size. Total fees and interest that are included in expenses on the Fund’s Statement of Operations related to its participation in the borrowing facility during the reporting period equal 0.04% of the Fund’s average net assets on an annualized basis. The Fund has the right to prepay such loans and terminate its participation in the conduit loan facility at any time upon prior notice.
At period end, the Fund had no borrowings outstanding.
Details of the borrowings for the reporting period are as follows:
Average Daily Loan Balance | $ | 298,370 | ||
Average Daily Interest Rate | 0.317 | % | ||
Fees Paid | $ | 111,150 | ||
Interest Paid | $ | 1,555 |
Reverse Repurchase Agreements. The Fund may engage in reverse repurchase agreements. A reverse repurchase agreement is the sale of one or more securities to a counterparty at an agreed-upon purchase price with the simultaneous agreement to repurchase those securities on a future date at a higher repurchase price. The repurchase price represents the repayment of the purchase price and interest accrued thereon over the term of the repurchase agreement. The cash received by the Fund in connection with a reverse repurchase agreement may be used for investment-related purposes such as purchasing portfolio securities or for other purposes such as those described in the preceding “Borrowings” note.
The Fund entered into a Committed Repurchase Transaction Facility (the “Facility”) with J.P. Morgan Securities LLC (the “counterparty’) which enables it to participate with certain other Oppenheimer funds in a committed reverse repurchase agreement facility that permits aggregate outstanding reverse repurchase agreements of up to $750 million, collectively. Interest is charged to the Fund on the purchase price of outstanding reverse repurchase agreements at current LIBOR rates plus an applicable spread. The Fund is also allocated its pro-rata share of an annual structuring fee based on the total Facility size and ongoing commitment fees based on the total unused amount of the Facility. The Fund retains the economic exposure to fluctuations in the value of securities subject to reverse repurchase agreements under the Facility and therefore these transactions are considered secured borrowings for financial reporting purposes. The Fund also continues to receive the economic benefit of interest payments received on securities subject to reverse repurchase agreements, in the form of a direct payment from the counterparty. These payments are included in interest income on the Statement of Operations. Total fees and interest related to the Fund’s participation in the Facility during the reporting period are included in expenses on the Fund’s Statement of Operations and equal 0.02% of the Fund’s average net assets on an annualized basis.
The securities subject to reverse repurchase agreements under the Facility are valued on a daily basis. To the extent this value, after adjusting for certain margin requirements of the Facility, exceeds the cash proceeds received, the Fund may request the counterparty to return securities equal in margin value to this excess. To the extent that the cash proceeds received
76 OPPENHEIMER ROCHESTER AMT-FREE MUNICIPAL FUND
9. Borrowings and Other Financing (Continued)
exceed the margin value of the securities subject to the transaction, the counterparty may request additional securities from the Fund. The Fund has the right to declare each Wednesday as the repurchase date for any outstanding reverse repurchase agreement upon delivery of advanced notification and may also recall any security subject to such a transaction by substituting eligible securities of equal or greater margin value according to the Facility’s terms.
Securities subject to reverse repurchase agreements are separately noted in the Statement of Investments. The Fund executed no transactions under the Facility during the reporting period.
Details of reverse repurchase agreement transactions for the reporting period are as follows:
Fees Paid | $ | 307,015 |
10. Pending Litigation
In 2009, several putative class action lawsuits were filed and later consolidated before the U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado against OppenheimerFunds, Inc. (“OFI”), OppenheimerFunds Distributor, Inc. (“OFDI”), and Oppenheimer Rochester California Municipal Fund, a fund advised by OFI Global Asset Management, Inc. and distributed by the Distributor (the “California Fund”), in connection with the California Fund’s investment performance. The plaintiffs asserted claims against OFI, OFDI and certain present and former trustees and officers of the California Fund under the federal securities laws, alleging, among other things, that the disclosure documents of the California Fund contained misrepresentations and omissions and the investment policies of the California Fund were not followed. Plaintiffs in the suit filed an amended complaint and defendants filed a motion to dismiss. In 2011, the court issued an order which granted in part and denied in part the defendants’ motion to dismiss. In 2012, plaintiffs filed a motion, which defendants opposed, to certify a class and appoint class representatives and class counsel. In March 2015, the court granted plaintiffs’ motion for class certification. In May 2015, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit vacated the class certification order and remanded the matter to the district court for further proceedings. In October 2015, the district court reaffirmed its order and determined that the suit will proceed as a class action. In December 2015, the Tenth Circuit denied defendants’ petition to appeal the district court’s reaffirmed class certification order.
OFI and OFDI believe the suit is without merit; that it is premature to render any opinion as to the likelihood of an outcome unfavorable to them in the suit; and that no estimate can yet be made as to the amount or range of any potential loss. Furthermore, OFI believes that the suit should not impair the ability of OFI or OFDI to perform their respective duties to the Fund and that the outcome of the suit should not have any material effect on the operations of any of the Oppenheimer funds.
77 OPPENHEIMER ROCHESTER AMT-FREE MUNICIPAL FUND
BOARD APPROVAL OF THE FUND’S INVESTMENT ADVISORY AND SUB-ADVISORY AGREEMENTS Unaudited
The Fund has entered into an investment advisory agreement with OFI Global Asset Management, Inc. (“OFI Global” or the “Adviser”), a wholly-owned subsidiary of OppenheimerFunds, Inc. (“OFI” or the “Sub-Adviser”) (“OFI Global” and “OFI” together the “Managers”) and OFI Global has entered into a sub-advisory agreement with OFI whereby OFI provides investment sub-advisory services to the Fund (collectively, the “Agreements”). Each year, the Board of Trustees (the “Board”), including a majority of the independent Trustees, is required to determine whether to approve the terms of the Agreements and the renewal thereof. The Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended, requires that the Board request and evaluate, and that the Managers provide, such information as may be reasonably necessary to evaluate the terms of the Agreements. The Board employs an independent consultant to prepare a report that provides information, including comparative information that the Board requests for that purpose. In addition to in-person meetings focused on this evaluation, the Board receives information throughout the year regarding Fund services, fees, expenses and performance.
The Adviser, Sub-Adviser and the independent consultant provided information to the Board on the following factors: (i) the nature, quality and extent of the Managers’ services, (ii) the comparative investment performance of the Fund and the Managers, (iii) the fees and expenses of the Fund, including comparative fee and expense information, (iv) the profitability of the Managers and their affiliates, including an analysis of the cost of providing services, (v) whether economies of scale are realized as the Fund grows and whether fee levels reflect these economies of scale for Fund investors and (vi) other benefits to the Managers from their relationship with the Fund. The Board was aware that there are alternatives to retaining the Managers.
Outlined below is a summary of the principal information considered by the Board as well as the Board’s conclusions.
Nature, Quality and Extent of Services. The Board considered information about the nature, quality and extent of the services provided to the Fund and information regarding the Managers’ key personnel who provide such services. The Managers’ duties include providing the Fund with the services of the portfolio managers and the Sub-Adviser’s investment team, who provide research, analysis and other advisory services in regard to the Fund’s investments; and securities trading services. OFI Global is responsible for oversight of third-party service providers; monitoring compliance with applicable Fund policies and procedures and adherence to the Fund’s investment restrictions; risk management; and oversight of the Sub-Adviser. OFI Global is also responsible for providing certain administrative services to the Fund as well. Those services include providing and supervising all administrative and clerical personnel who are necessary in order to provide effective corporate administration for the Fund; compiling and maintaining records with respect to the Fund’s operations; preparing and filing reports required by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission; preparing periodic reports regarding the operations of the Fund for its shareholders; preparing proxy materials for shareholder meetings; and preparing the registration statements required by federal and state securities laws for the sale of the Fund’s shares. OFI Global also provides the Fund with office space, facilities and equipment.
The Board also considered the quality of the services provided and the quality of the Managers’ resources that are available to the Fund. The Board took account of the fact that
78 OPPENHEIMER ROCHESTER AMT-FREE MUNICIPAL FUND
the Sub-Adviser has had over fifty years of experience as an investment adviser and that its assets under management rank it among the top mutual fund managers in the United States. The Board evaluated the Managers’ advisory, administrative, accounting, legal, compliance services and risk management, and information the Board has received regarding the experience and professional qualifications of the Managers’ key personnel and the size and functions of its staff. In its evaluation of the quality of the portfolio management services provided, the Board considered the experience of Daniel Loughran, Scott Cottier, Troy Willis, Mark DeMitry, Michael Camarella, Charles Pulire and Elizabeth Mossow, the portfolio managers for the Fund, and the Sub-Adviser’s investment team and analysts. The Board members also considered the totality of their experiences with the Managers as directors or trustees of the Fund and other funds advised by the Managers. The Board considered information regarding the quality of services provided by affiliates of the Managers, which the Board members have become knowledgeable about through their experiences with the Managers and in connection with the renewal of the Fund’s service agreements. The Board concluded, in light of the Managers’ experience, reputation, personnel, operations and resources that the Fund benefits from the services provided under the Agreements.
Investment Performance of the Managers and the Fund. Throughout the year, the Managers provided information on the investment performance of the Fund, the Adviser and the Sub-Adviser, including comparative performance information. The Board also reviewed information, prepared by the Managers and by the independent consultant, comparing the Fund’s historical performance to relevant benchmarks or market indices and to the performance of other retail funds in the high yield muni category. The Board noted that the Fund’s one-year, three-year, and five-year performance was better than its category median although its ten-year performance was below its category median.
Fees and Expenses of the Fund. The Board reviewed the fees paid to the Adviser and the other expenses borne by the Fund. The Board also considered the comparability of the fees charged and the services provided to the Fund to the fees and services for other clients or accounts advised by the Adviser. The independent consultant provided comparative data in regard to the fees and expenses of the Fund and other retail front-end load high yield muni funds with comparable asset levels and distribution features. The Board noted that the Fund’s contractual management fees and total expenses were lower than its peer group median and category median.
Economies of Scale and Profits Realized by the Managers. The Board considered information regarding the Managers’ costs in serving as the Fund’s investment adviser and sub-adviser, including the costs associated with the personnel and systems necessary to manage the Fund, and information regarding the Managers’ profitability from their relationship with the Fund. The Board also considered that the Managers must be able to pay and retain experienced professional personnel at competitive rates to provide quality services to the Fund. The Board reviewed whether the Managers may realize economies of scale in managing and supporting the Fund. The Board noted that the Fund currently has management fee breakpoints, which are intended to share with Fund shareholders economies of scale that may exist as the Fund’s assets grow.
Other Benefits to the Managers. In addition to considering the profits realized by the Managers, the Board considered information that was provided regarding the direct and
79 OPPENHEIMER ROCHESTER AMT-FREE MUNICIPAL FUND
BOARD APPROVAL OF THE FUND’S INVESTMENT ADVISORY AND SUB-ADVISORY AGREEMENTS Unaudited / Continued
indirect benefits the Managers receive as a result of their relationship with the Fund, including compensation paid to the Managers’ affiliates.
Conclusions. These factors were also considered by the independent Trustees meeting separately from the full Board, assisted by experienced counsel to the Fund and to the independent Trustees. Fund counsel and the independent Trustees’ counsel are independent of the Managers within the meaning and intent of the Securities and Exchange Commission Rules.
Based on its review of the information it received and its evaluations described above, the Board, including a majority of the independent Trustees, decided to continue the Agreements through September 30, 2016. In arriving at its decision, the Board did not identify any factor or factors as being more important than others, but considered all of the above information, and considered the terms and conditions of the Agreements, including the management fees, in light of all the surrounding circumstances.
80 OPPENHEIMER ROCHESTER AMT-FREE MUNICIPAL FUND
PORTFOLIO PROXY VOTING POLICIES AND GUIDELINES; UPDATES TO STATEMENTS OF INVESTMENTS Unaudited
The Fund has adopted Portfolio Proxy Voting Policies and Guidelines under which the Fund votes proxies relating to securities (“portfolio proxies”) held by the Fund. A description of the Fund’s Portfolio Proxy Voting Policies and Guidelines is available (i) without charge, upon request, by calling the Fund toll-free at 1.800.CALL OPP (225.5677), (ii) on the Fund’s website at www.oppenheimerfunds.com, and (iii) on the SEC’s website at www.sec.gov. In addition, the Fund is required to file Form N-PX, with its complete proxy voting record for the 12 months ended June 30th, no later than August 31st of each year. The Fund’s voting record is available (i) without charge, upon request, by calling the Fund toll-free at 1.800.CALL OPP (225.5677), and (ii) in the Form N-PX filing on the SEC’s website at www.sec.gov.
The Fund files its complete schedule of portfolio holdings with the SEC for the first quarter and the third quarter of each fiscal year on Form N-Q. The Fund’s Form N-Q filings are available on the SEC’s website at www.sec.gov. Those forms may be reviewed and copied at the SEC’s Public Reference Room in Washington, D.C. Information on the operation of the Public Reference Room may be obtained by calling 1-800-SEC-0330.
Householding—Delivery of Shareholder Documents
This is to inform you about OppenheimerFunds’ “householding” policy. If more than one member of your household maintains an account in a particular fund, OppenheimerFunds will mail only one copy of the fund’s prospectus (or, if available, the fund’s summary prospectus), annual and semiannual report and privacy policy. The consolidation of these mailings, called householding, benefits your fund through reduced mailing expense, and benefits you by reducing the volume of mail you receive from OppenheimerFunds. Householding does not affect the delivery of your account statements.
Please note that we will continue to household these mailings for as long as you remain an OppenheimerFunds shareholder, unless you request otherwise. If you prefer to receive multiple copies of these materials, please call us at 1.800.CALL-OPP (225-5677). You may also notify us in writing or via email. We will begin sending you individual copies of the prospectus (or, if available, the summary prospectus), reports and privacy policy within 30 days of receiving your request to stop householding.
81 OPPENHEIMER ROCHESTER AMT-FREE MUNICIPAL FUND
OPPENHEIMER ROCHESTER AMT-FREE MUNICIPAL FUND
Trustees and Officers | Brian F. Wruble, Chairman of the Board of Trustees and Trustee | |
As of 3/1/16 | Beth Ann Brown, Trustee | |
Matthew P. Fink, Trustee | ||
Edmund P. Giambastiani, Jr., Trustee | ||
Elizabeth Krentzman, Trustee | ||
Mary F. Miller, Trustee | ||
Joel W. Motley, Trustee | ||
Joanne Pace, Trustee | ||
Daniel Vandivort, Trustee | ||
Arthur P. Steinmetz, Trustee, President and Principal Executive Officer | ||
Daniel G. Loughran, Vice President | ||
Scott S. Cottier, Vice President | ||
Troy E. Willis, Vice President | ||
Mark R. DeMitry, Vice President | ||
Michael L. Camarella, Vice President | ||
Charles S. Pulire, Vice President | ||
Richard Stein, Vice President | ||
Cynthia Lo Bessette, Secretary and Chief Legal Officer | ||
Jennifer Sexton, Vice President and Chief Business Officer | ||
Mary Ann Picciotto, Chief Compliance Officer and Chief Anti-Money | ||
Laundering Officer | ||
Brian S. Petersen, Treasurer and Principal Financial & Accounting Officer | ||
Manager | OFI Global Asset Management, Inc. | |
Sub-Adviser | OppenheimerFunds, Inc. | |
Distributor | OppenheimerFunds Distributor, Inc. | |
Transfer and Shareholder | OFI Global Asset Management, Inc. | |
Servicing Agent | ||
Sub-Transfer Agent | Shareholder Services, Inc. | |
DBA OppenheimerFunds Services | ||
Independent Registered | KPMG LLP | |
Public Accounting Firm | ||
Legal Counsel | Kramer Levin Naftalis & Frankel LLP | |
The financial statements included herein have been taken from the records of the Fund without examination of those records by the independent registered public accounting firm. |
© 2016 OppenheimerFunds, Inc. All rights reserved.
82 OPPENHEIMER ROCHESTER AMT-FREE MUNICIPAL FUND
As an Oppenheimer fund shareholder, you are entitled to know how we protect your personal information and how we limit its disclosure.
Information Sources
We obtain nonpublic personal information about our shareholders from the following sources:
● | Applications or other forms |
● | When you create a user ID and password for online account access |
● | When you enroll in eDocs Direct, our electronic document delivery service |
● | Your transactions with us, our affiliates or others |
● | A software program on our website, often referred to as a “cookie,” which indicates which parts of our site you’ve visited |
● | When you set up challenge questions to reset your password online |
If you visit oppenheimerfunds.com and do not log on to the secure account information areas, we do not obtain any personal information about you. When you do log on to a secure area, we do obtain your user ID and password to identify you. We also use this information to provide you with products and services you have requested, to inform you about products and services that you may be interested in and assist you in other ways.
We do not collect personal information through our website unless you willingly provide it to us, either directly by email or in those areas of the website that request information. In order to update your personal information (including your mailing address, email address and phone number) you must first log on and visit your user profile.
If you have set your browser to warn you before accepting cookies, you will receive the warning message with each cookie. You can refuse cookies by turning them off in your browser. However, doing so may limit your access to certain sections of our website.
We use cookies to help us improve and manage our website. For example, cookies help us recognize new versus repeat visitors to the site, track the pages visited, and enable some special features on the website. This data helps us provide a better service for our website visitors.
Protection of Information
We do not disclose any non-public personal information (such as names on a customer list) about current or former customers to anyone, except as permitted by law.
Disclosure of Information
Copies of confirmations, account statements and other documents reporting activity in your fund accounts are made available to your financial advisor (as designated by you). We may also use details about you and your investments to help us, our financial service affiliates, or firms that jointly market their financial products and services with ours, to better serve your investment needs or suggest financial services or educational material that may be of interest to you. If this requires us to provide you with an opportunity to “opt in” or “opt out” of such information sharing with a firm not affiliated with us, you will receive notification on how to do so, before any such sharing takes place.
Right of Refusal
We will not disclose your personal information to unaffiliated third parties (except as permitted by law), unless we first offer you a reasonable opportunity to refuse or “opt out” of such disclosure.
83 OPPENHEIMER ROCHESTER AMT-FREE MUNICIPAL FUND
PRIVACY POLICY NOTICE Continued
Internet Security and Encryption
In general, the email services provided by our website are encrypted and provide a secure and private means of communication with us. To protect your own privacy, confidential and/or personal information should only be communicated via email when you are advised that you are using a secure website. As a security measure, we do not include personal or account information in non-secure emails, and we advise you not to send such information to us in non-secure emails. Instead, you may take advantage of the secure features of our website to encrypt your email correspondence. To do this, you will need to use a browser that supports Secure Sockets Layer (SSL) protocol.
We do not guarantee or warrant that any part of our website, including files available for download, are free of viruses or other harmful code. It is your responsibility to take appropriate precautions, such as use of an anti-virus software package, to protect your computer hardware and software.
● | All transactions, including redemptions, exchanges and purchases, are secured by SSL and 256-bit encryption. SSL is used to establish a secure connection between your PC and OppenheimerFunds’ server. It transmits information in an encrypted and scrambled format. |
● | Encryption is achieved through an electronic scrambling technology that uses a “key” to code and then decode the data. Encryption acts like the cable converter box you may have on your television set. It scrambles data with a secret code so that no one can make sense of it while it is being transmitted. When the data reaches its destination, the same software unscrambles the data. |
● | You can exit the secure area by either closing your browser, or for added security, you can use the Log Out button before you close your browser. |
Other Security Measures
We maintain physical, electronic and procedural safeguards to protect your personal account information. Our employees and agents have access to that information only so that they may offer you products or provide services, for example, when responding to your account questions.
How You Can Help
You can also do your part to keep your account information private and to prevent unauthorized transactions. If you obtain a user ID and password for your account, do not allow it to be used by anyone else. Also, take special precautions when accessing your account on a computer used by others.
Who We Are
This joint notice describes the privacy policies of the Oppenheimer funds, OppenheimerFunds, Inc., each of its investment adviser subsidiaries, OppenheimerFunds Distributor, Inc. and OFI Global Trust Co. It applies to all Oppenheimer fund accounts you presently have, or may open in the future, using your Social Security number—whether or not you remain a shareholder of our funds. This notice was last updated March 2015. In the event it is updated or changed, we will post an updated notice on our website at oppenheimerfunds.com. If you have any questions about this privacy policy, write to us at P.O. Box 5270, Denver, CO 80217-5270, email us by clicking on the Contact Us section of our website at oppenheimerfunds.com or call us at 1.800.CALL OPP (225.5677).
84 OPPENHEIMER ROCHESTER AMT-FREE MUNICIPAL FUND
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK.
85 OPPENHEIMER ROCHESTER AMT-FREE MUNICIPAL FUND
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK.
86 OPPENHEIMER ROCHESTER AMT-FREE MUNICIPAL FUND
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK.
87 OPPENHEIMER ROCHESTER AMT-FREE MUNICIPAL FUND
Visit us at oppenheimerfunds.com for 24-hr access to account information and transactions or call us at 800 CALL OPP (800 225 5677) for 24-hr automated information and automated transactions. Representatives also available Mon–Fri 8am–8pm ET.
| ||||
Visit Us
oppenheimerfunds.com
Call Us
800 225 5677
Follow Us
| ||||
| Oppenheimer funds are distributed by OppenheimerFunds Distributor, Inc. 225 Liberty Street, New York, NY 10281-1008 © 2016 OppenheimerFunds Distributor, Inc. All rights reserved.
RS0310.001.0116 March 24, 2016 |
Item 2. Code of Ethics.
Not applicable to semiannual reports.
Item 3. Audit Committee Financial Expert.
Not applicable to semiannual reports.
Item 4. Principal Accountant Fees and Services.
Not applicable to semiannual reports.
Item 5. Audit Committee of Listed Registrants
Not applicable.
Item 6. Schedule of Investments.
a) Not applicable. The complete schedule of investments is included in Item 1 of this Form N-CSR.
b) Not applicable.
Item 7. Disclosure of Proxy Voting Policies and Procedures for Closed-End Management Investment Companies.
Not applicable.
Item 8. Portfolio Managers of Closed-End Management Investment Companies.
Not applicable.
Item 9. Purchases of Equity Securities by Closed-End Management Investment Company and Affiliated Purchasers.
Not applicable.
Item 10. Submission of Matters to a Vote of Security Holders.
The Fund’s Governance Committee Provisions with Respect to Nominations of Directors/Trustees to the Respective Boards
None
Item 11. Controls and Procedures.
Based on their evaluation of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in rule 30a-3(c) under the Investment Company Act of 1940 (17 CFR 270.30a-3(c)) as of 1/29/2016, the registrant’s principal executive officer and principal financial officer found the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures to provide reasonable assurances that information required to be disclosed by the registrant in the reports that it files under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (a) is accumulated and communicated to registrant’s management, including its principal executive officer and principal financial officer, to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosure, and (b) is recorded, processed, summarized and reported, within the time periods specified in the rules and forms adopted by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.
There have been no changes in the registrant’s internal controls over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s second fiscal quarter of the period covered by this report that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.
Item 12. Exhibits.
(a) | (1) Not applicable to semiannual reports. | |
(2) Exhibits attached hereto. | ||
(3) Not applicable. | ||
(b) | Exhibit attached hereto. |
SIGNATURES
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the Investment Company Act of 1940, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.
Oppenheimer Rochester AMT-Free Municipal Fund
By: | /s/ Arthur P. Steinmetz
| |
Arthur P. Steinmetz
| ||
Principal Executive Officer
| ||
Date: | 3/15/2016 |
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the Investment Company Act of 1940, this report has been signed below by the following persons on behalf of the registrant and in the capacities and on the dates indicated.
By: | /s/ Arthur P. Steinmetz
| |
Arthur P. Steinmetz
| ||
Principal Executive Officer
| ||
Date: | 3/15/2016 |
By: | /s/ Brian S. Petersen
| |
Brian S. Petersen
| ||
Principal Financial Officer
| ||
Date: | 3/15/2016 |