mfs response

MFS responds to Stephen Mayne:

Guy Hutchings, CEO, MFSIM, MFS Limited, writes: Re. "Will MFS trigger a financial planners backlash? You bet" (yesterday, item 3). There were a number of inaccuracies and omissions in Stephen Mayne's article on the MFS Premium Income Fund published on 30 January. In the interests of alleviating the undue concern that would have been caused to investors in the fund I would make the following points.

The MFS Premium Income Fund is not as you said a big investor in the MFS Living and Leisure Group (MPY). The fund has 0.3% of its assets in the MPY stapled securities. The fund has a loan facility to the group which we fully expect to be repaid before maturity.
MFS Investment Management does not pay high commission to financial planners. The rate of commission paid to financial planners in 44 basis points (0.44%) - one of the lowest retail commission rates in the industry and designed to appeal to fee-for-service advisers. Commissions are paid by MFSIM not the Premium Income Fund.
Only 16% of the funds assets are invested in MFS related entities and there are no funds invested in MFS Limited or its wholly owned subsidiaries. No assets in the Premium Income Fund are impaired in terms of generating income or recovery of principal and the fund continues to pay its distributions at the target rates.
The deferral of redemptions by the Premium Income Fund is not caused by a deterioration in the quality of its assets. Distributions will continue to be paid from income generated by the fund. MFSIM has waived its management fee for the duration of the deferral.