https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1342947/000089109222001046/bbh497ssta-rf.htm
497 1 bbh497ssta-rf.htm PROSPECTUS AND SAI SUPPLEMENT
BBH TRUST
BBH PARTNER FUND – SELECT SHORT TERM ASSETS
(BBSTX)
SUPPLEMENT DATED MARCH 28, 2022 TO THE
PROSPECTUS
AND STATEMENT OF ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
DATED MARCH 1, 2022
The following information supplements, and, to the extent inconsistent therewith, supersedes, certain information in the Prospectus and Statement of Additional Information. Unless otherwise noted, capitalized terms used in this supplement have the same meaning as defined in the Prospectus and Statement of Additional Information.
I. FUND LIQUIDATION
On March 28, 2022, the Board of Trustees of BBH Trust (the “Trust”) approved a Plan of Liquidation for the BBH Partner Fund – Select Short Term Assets (the “Fund”) pursuant to which the Fund will be liquidated (the “Liquidation”) on or about the earlier of (i) April 13, 2022 and (ii) the date on which all shareholders that are not affiliated with the Adviser have redeemed their respective shares of the Fund (the “Liquidation Date”). Shareholder approval of the Liquidation is not required.
Beginning on March 28, 2022 through the Liquidation Date, the Fund may depart from its stated investment objective and policies as it liquidates holdings in preparation for the distribution of assets to investors. During this time, the Fund may hold more cash or cash equivalents than normal, which may prevent the Fund from meeting its stated investment objective. Shareholders of record as of the close of business on the Liquidation Date will receive their proportionate interest in all of the net assets of the Fund in complete cancellation and redemption of all the outstanding shares of the Fund. Payment will be made in accordance with instructions from each shareholder. If a shareholder has not provided instructions by the time proceeds are distributed, that shareholder’s liquidation proceeds shall be distributed based on the payment instructions on file for such shareholder with the Fund’s Transfer Agent. For those accounts with no bank instructions on file with the Fund’s Transfer Agent, the Transfer Agent shall issue a check. If required by the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, the Fund will make an income distribution prior to the Liquidation Date.
Shareholders of the Fund may redeem their investments as described in the Fund’s Prospectus prior to the Liquidation Date. If the Fund has not received your redemption request or other instruction by the Liquidation Date, your shares will be redeemed on the Liquidation Date, and you will receive your proceeds from the Fund, subject to any required withholding.
The Adviser will bear all expenses of the Liquidation to the extent such expenses are not part of the Fund’s normal and customary fees and operating expenses. However, the Fund and its shareholders will bear transaction costs and any potential tax consequences associated with turnover of the Fund’s portfolio.
The liquidation of the Fund, like any redemption of Fund shares, will constitute an event upon which a gain or loss may be recognized for state and federal income tax purposes, depending on the type of account and the adjusted cost basis of the investor’s shares. The tax year for the Fund will end on the Liquidation Date. Please contact your tax advisor to discuss the tax consequences to you of the liquidation.
II. CLOSURE OF THE FUND TO PURCHASES
Effective as of the close of business on March 28, 2022, the Fund will be closed to purchases of Fund shares; however, the closure to purchases of Fund shares does not restrict any shareholders from redeeming shares of the Fund.
The Fund’s ability to enforce the closure of the Fund to purchases with respect to certain retirement plan accounts and accounts held by financial intermediaries may vary depending on systems capabilities, applicable contractual and legal restrictions, and cooperation of those retirement plans and intermediaries.
Please contact the Fund at 1-800-575-1265 if you have any questions.
PLEASE RETAIN THIS SUPPLEMENT FOR FUTURE REFERENCE.

You make a good point @hank that bond funds have fallen harder and sooner than the FED's 0.25% increase would indicate. I guess that is because like the equity markets, the bond market is also forward looking. I think many pundits believe the goal is to get to 3% by year end. Not sure where they believe the sweet spot is, but I wouldn't be surprised if they "ideally" target 4-6% over a few years if it correlates to full employment and inflation back to a normal 2-4%.
Forward looking, within a year of reaching the sweet spot goal may be good times in bond-land again. Of course throw in another financial disaster and we're back at square one.

"....."He was a visionary, an innovator, and a philanthropist who had tremendous curiosity about the world around him and who lived his life to the fullest each and every day," the Johnson family said in a statement. "To the end, he never lost his enthusiasm, his sense of humor, or his energetic spirit.".....Johnson served as chairman and CEO of Fidelity Investments, the company his father started, for over 40 years, and transformed the Boston-area mutual fund manager into the second-largest investment management company in the US and one of the most successful diversified financial services firms in the world.....The firm, now led by his daughter Abigail Johnson....."
https://www.cnn.com/2022/03/24/investing/edward-ned-johnson-iii-fidelity-death/index.html
More https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Johnson_III

Not to state what many other much smarter people than I have said: the cash is trash argument should be placed in the context of financial assets, not the cost of living. Even if inflation is running at 7% cash is not trash if stocks and bonds, or a mix, are in negative territory. Cash is not trash in 2022 as it has outperformed both stocks and bonds, generally speaking. As for bonds, I follow the advice that the best time to buy any asset is when there is blood in the streets. We are going through a 2008 moment for bonds. Of course there are sound arguments for why bonds are a terrible investment; that is what makes the moment. Just saw that there were net INFLOWS to fixed income ETFs last week. At some point fixed income will recover and those who bailed will wish they bought more instead. Will that happen next week, next year or even further down the road? I don't know, but at some point there will be a chart like those on PV that show a draw down and recovery, as it (almost) always has been.

@BaseballFan - I consider you a great asset to the board based on your investment related contributions over the years. As long as everyone is civil no harm in voicing dissenting views. I actually pay $$ to subscribe to Bill Fleckenstein’s “Daily Rap.” His political opinions run similar to yours - and distinctly contrary to my own. But I’m willing to overlook that right wing dogma because it’s all about investing. And I think he, like you, has some interesting thoughts on investing.
It’s not for me to decide, but I would hope everyone tries their best to talk about “best ideas” for preserving and growing our capital and less about politics or which party is best for growing wealth. I do believe there are investments for every “season”. So let’s size up the current macro financial environment as it exists today and work to come up with investments that work.

+1 @Junkster
You are correct re my status. Pension and SS cover basic needs. I had a better than average retirement package I guess. So the IRAs allow for travel, etc. and serve as reserves in case a large unexpected outlay comes along.
Still, I keep an open mind on the subject. Good to hear the higher interest rates have led to better annuity payouts.. In the past, I couldn’t see any financial advantage - albeit one might increase their living standard a bit on the payments.
Good thread.

Some dumb questions / considerations
- In converting your pent-up investments (which are currently earning a return) into a stream of steady cash payouts in excess of what you have an immediate need for you are than faced with either (1) having to spend (or donate) that excess income or (2) having to reinvest it somewhere else. If you do reinvest it, it is no longer a tax exempt / tax deferred investment.
- There may be rare periods in the future where a very large sum is required. Things like needing a new roof or well for your home, or having to buy a new motor vehicle or unexpected legal expenses. Aren’t you better off having a large pool of money invested somewhere for such occurrences than having to borrow the money if / when a need arises?
- You would appear to be trading away your inflation protection (from staying invested) for that steady income stream. Most likely that isn’t too significant a consideration at an elderly age - but it might be.
- Are you not somewhat at the mercy of the insurer? What if they become insolvent?

Hank, correct me if I am wrong. But aren’t all your income needs provided by a pension and social security? If so I would see little reason to annuitize. Again, annuitization is very much based on individualistic financial situations/mindsets. Many as they age want nothing to do with investing/risk. Just a secure income stream till death do they part.

Here's the page from which @bee's except was taken:
https://www.deepcapture.com/the-story-of-deep-capture-by-mark-mitchell/
naked shorters ... (it's flatly illegal goes the argument
Is naked shorting flatly illegal, or is that just one side's argument?
Naked shorting is not unconditionally illegal, just as going long without having the money to cover it on the trade date is not unconditionally illegal.
Is it illegal to buy a security and then talk it up? It depends.
"[A]busive 'naked' short selling as part of a manipulative scheme is always illegal under the general antifraud provisions of the federal securities laws, including Rule 10b-5".
SEC Rule 10b-21 https://www.sec.gov/rules/final/2008/34-58774.pdf
Absent fraud, naked shorts can be legal, so long as they comply with other SEC regs. "'Naked' short selling is not necessarily a violation of the federal securities laws or the [Security and Exchange] Commission’s rules. Indeed, in certain circumstances, 'naked' short selling contributes to market liquidity."
https://www.sec.gov/investor/pubs/regsho.htm
Apparently naked shorting is not flatly illegal, goes the official argument. The DTCC agrees, saying that "there is some legal naked short selling.
With respect to Overstock, "In 2004, Cohodes, a partner at a hedge fund called Rocker Partners, and David Rocker, the fund’s founder, shorted Overstock after concluding that Byrne was making untenable promises about its financial performance. "
https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2020/12/14/a-tycoons-deep-state-conspiracy-dive
That's 18, not 15 years ago. This matters because Regulation SHO became effective January 2005, and Rule 10b-21 became effective Oct 2008.
For a very different, expansive perspective of the alleged conspiracies, here's Joe Nocera's business column from Feb 2006:
https://www.nytimes.com/2006/02/25/business/overstocks-campaign-of-menace.html
To bring this back to the Reuters piece - put options were purchased. That's a way to gain the same exposure as with a short, but there's no failure to deliver; no security lending is involved. As the CEO of Farmland stated, ""This is not about shorting. This is about securities fraud."

Deep Capture is an interesting read:

The crimes are the work of Wall Street hedge fund managers and brokers who engage in a common trading strategy known as short-selling. A short sale is a way of making money when the price of a stock goes down. You borrow shares from someone else and immediately sell them off. If the price drops, you buy the shares back and return them to the original owner, pocketing the difference. If a company goes out of business, short-sellers hit the jackpot.
This is perfectly legal and unobjectionable. But some short-sellers do not play by the rules. A small group of powerful hedge fund managers stop at nothing to annihilate the companies they sell short. Their tactics include: blackmail, smear campaigns, espionage, fraud, harassment, extortion, bribery, rumor-mongering, sabotage, off-shore money laundering, political cronyism, frivolous lawsuits, witness tampering, biased financial research, false identities, bogus credit ratings, bribery, libelous blogs, bad science, forgery, wiretapping, counterfeiting, collusion, lying, cheating, threats and theft.
Their most egregious trick is to sell “phantom stock.” By exploiting a glitch in Wall Street’s computerized trading system, and a loophole in federal regulations, some hedge funds sell virtually unlimited amounts of stock that they have not yet borrowed or purchased. This is often referred to as “naked short selling.” Hedge funds use this tactic to flood the market with supply and drive down prices – which is blatantly illegal.

an-overview-of-deep-capture

Rather than talking up a stock and then selling it at an inflated price, hedge funds and others may be buying puts, talking down a stock, and then exercising the put at a deflated price. That is, selling a stock at a locked-in (option) price and covering at a manipulated low price.

Activist short sellers like Muddy Waters' Carson Block bet against public companies they deem over-valued and then publish their investment thesis. They say their work aids market efficiency and dispute Mitts' analysis as flawed. ...
[Regarding Farmland Partners, Inc. FPLN] he ... published his analysis of 1,720 pseudonymous posts attacking publicly listed stocks on financial website Seeking Alpha between 2010 and 2017. His study found such posts were preceded by unusual and suspicious trading through stock options, in a process he called "short and distort".

https://www.reuters.com/business/how-columbia-professor-became-scourge-activist-short-sellers-2022-03-18/

Giant fish eat big fish, big fish eat small fish, small fish eat tiny fish,....and so it goes.
So Eaton Vance was a acquisitive company that acquired ESG firm Calvert, etc.
Then the big gobbler Morgan Stanley gobbled Eaton Vance (but the name lives in funds), and before that it gobbled E*Trade, Smith Barney, Dean Witter, Discover, etc.
Morgan Stanley itself needed rescue during the financial crisis.

+1. @davfor
I was sticking to my knitting, following my pre-planned Order of Battle, shifting into bonds, earlier, and reached my 60% bonds goal in the portfolio. Ballast, reduce volatility..... Along came changing realities: rising rates, war, inflation, supply issues..... I still own a big hunk of bonds. But I just exchanged a mouthful of them for TRP Financial Services, PRISX.
After cashing-out PTIAX, that $$$ will go to the sweep account until I decide on a fitting destination for the money. My ENIC has been a true dawg--- until 3 days ago. I'm liking the action there. Limit order is in for $1.60.
Something else I've uncovered: ATGFF. AltaGas. Lots of US customers, but HQ in Calgary. Nice dividend. Would love to get it a bit below Fair Value.

Quite a reach I’d think.
CNBC

@hank, hope all is well with you. Situation is quite different today than that of the 70’s. Today, the Fed is part of the market instead being the last resort of lending during the period of financial crisis. By keeping the interest rate low since 2008’s Great Recession is beyond unnecessary while distorting the market and its valuation. Now we are facing high inflation and there are few option except to raise rate for the next few years.
By the way, I come to this board to learn from others experience. Also MFO helped me to pick few great funds that I wouldn’t know about. As always the monthly commentary is first class.
A recent post from LizAnn Sounders (Schwab) may shed more insight on the current situation.
https://schwab.com/resource-center/insights/content/market-snapshot
Also there is transcript posted below the video. Enjoy.

I just enjoy Forsyth. Didn’t mean to cite him as a predictive model. I suspect he is of a bearish inclination (as am I) and his articles often reference bearish views of various market observers.
If folks don’t want Forsyth’s columns referenced any more, let me know and I’ll cease.
One nice thing about the internet and financial commentary in general - You can find just about any point of view you want out there,

This may not be as huge a problem that the media is making it out to be.
Insurance companies and funds sell CDSs (i.e. insurance on underlying bonds) in normal times and pocket the premium MOST of the time. But they have to pay up SOMETIMES. The CDS sellers pay only when the swap association declares a default event and that hasn't happened yet. A poster at Fido Inv Community (a closed group, so links not possible) estimated max exposure of Pimco Income/PIMIX at 12c, so not a huge deal when the NAV is $11.22. An open thread is at M*, see below.
On the other hand, many Pimco CEFs have sold off on such news even when no Russian CDS exposure is seen there (I got a very low-ball limit-buy fill on PDO yesterday and was puzzled at first). Moreover, Blackrock may have much higher exposure to Russian CDS than Pimco. Industry is better prepared now after the AIG fiasco before/during the financial crisis (AIG had an enormous CDS exposure and had to be bailed out).
https://community.morningstar.com/s/question/0D53o00005wYHyiCAG/pimco-amassed-billions-of-exposure-to-russia-debt-facing-default

The Newport Beach, California-based asset manager had at least $1.5 billion of sovereign debt, according to the latest fund filings compiled by Bloomberg. It had also placed about $1 billion of bets on Russia via the credit-default swap market as of Dec. 31, according to fund documents on its website. The Financial Times reported the holdings earlier on Thursday and said Pimco faces billions of dollars of losses should Russia default on its debt.
The majority of Pimco’s swaps sit in its $140 billion Income fund, run by Chief Investment Officer Dan Ivascyn, alongside Alfred Murata and Joshua Anderson. The fund disclosed that it had written almost $942 million of protection on Russia by the end of 2021. The other funds holding positions include Pimco’s Total Return bond fund, its Emerging Markets bond fund, and Low Duration income funds.

https://investmentnews.com/pimco-amassed-billions-of-exposure-to-russia-debt-facing-default-218403
I invested a small % of Pimco Income fund. Several weeks I found the fund has about 1.3% exposure of Russian debt, I sold the entire position.
Also read elsewhere that many emerging bond funds, especially those invested in local currency, have sizable Russia exposure, are having issues. Will the Russian bonds default?
Banks also have billions in to Russia exposure and the fallout is uncertain.
https://axios.com/western-banks-russia-chart-58735fa9-1ddd-428b-99c9-dfa1e6781452.html

The answer is "no". At least in 2020, with reduced income and economic impact checks coming from the Treasury due to the pandemic, every state was a "winner". That doesn't mean states fared equally well, nor is this a situation that will persist.

For the 2020 federal fiscal year, all 50 states came out ahead. That included New York, which got a return of $1.59 for every tax dollar sent to Washington, a dramatic increase from the 91 cents it received in 2019...
Every state – and particularly hard-hit New York – received large sums of COVID-era relief at the height of the pandemic, buoyed by programs like the Payroll Protection Program for businesses and nonprofits. States also received a boost in unemployment benefits for out-of-work Americans. The extra federal funds contributed to a projected $5 billion surplus in New York’s budget this year.
It was a period that saw Congress and then-President Donald J. Trump pass the CARES Act, a $2.2 trillion package that authorized $1,200 direct stimulus payments to most Americans. ...
While New York netted $7,236 per resident on a per-capita basis, 39 states fared better. New Mexico ranked best at $16,999; New Jersey ranked last at $4,454.
... While various COVID relief programs have continued into 2021 and 2022 – helping bolster the state government’s financial footing – they will ultimately run out and return New York to its status as a “donor state.”

https://gothamist.com/news/new-york-is-no-longer-a-donor-state-at-least-for-now

Excerpt from The Financial Times (See link provided)
The London Metal Exchange suspended trading in one of its main contracts after a vicious “short squeeze” sent the price of nickel soaring and left a Chinese metals tycoon facing billions of dollars in potential losses. Nickel prices doubled on Tuesday and briefly rose above a record $100,000 a tonne as banks and brokers rushed to close part of a huge position amassed by Xiang Guangda, the billionaire founder of China’s leading stainless steel producer Tsingshan Holding Group. It later pulled back closer to $80,000.Xiang had bet that the price of nickel would fall, but when the market moved sharply the other way, he would have been required to either post more cash to cover his losses or buy back the position.
See first story on Google Search Page:
Shorting anything is wicked. I’ve been tempted to short the oil market in recent days (such funds exist) but withheld fire.
Music Anyone?

here are the top holdings of PRWCX as of 2/28/22. I believe that BD is the only new company in the top 10. So if he's making changes in the portfolio its outside the top 10. Alphabet's % of the overall portfolio has decreased.
Top 10 Holdings (02/28/2022)
Data as of:
02/28/2022
Holding Name
% of Fund
Microsoft--6.55%
Amazon.com--5.76%
GE -- 4.67%
Alphabet --3.97%
Yum! Brands-- 3.16%
Thermo Fisher Scientific-- 2.99%
Humana-- 2.54%
PerkinElmer-- 2.46%
Becton, Dickinson & Company-- 2.34%
PNC Financial Services Group-- 2.32%