What 11,896 excess reportable income records actually show

Excess reportable income is the tax charge on money an offshore fund earned and never paid you. Each manager publishes it, as a spreadsheet or a PDF. Here is what 11,896 records across 2,755 funds and 8 managers look like when you count them.

Original analysis · reporting-fund income figures published by 8 managers, period ends 2018 to 2025

Nil is common, and nil is not a property of the fund

31.1% of all records are nil. Most of the time, looking up your fund produces a zero and you have nothing to add to your return, which is why people stop looking.

They should not. Of the 2,298 funds in the set with more than one reported period, 904 (39.3%) have reported both nil and non-nil in different years. Only 254 (11.1%) were nil in every period held here. A nil last year tells you almost nothing about this year. The only way to know is to look again.

Nine records in ten are not in sterling

90.8% of the records are denominated in something other than sterling. The mix runs 58.1% USD, 28.8% EUR, 9.2% GBP, and then a long tail. Every non-sterling record has to be converted before it can go on a return, at the HMRC monthly rate for the month the income arises, which means the reader of a manager's spreadsheet has a second job after finding the number.

This is also where a calculator quietly goes wrong. Hard-code the conversion to dollars, which is easy to do because the dollar is the majority case, and the 41.9% of records that are not dollars are either refused or divided by the dollar rate. A euro figure divided by the dollar rate is wrong by roughly the euro-dollar cross, silently, in the taxpayer's favour or against it depending on the year.

How much of your fund's history is even published

The median fund in this set has 5 reported periods; the most-covered has 8. Coverage per manager starts at very different points: iShares from 2018-02-28, Amundi only from 2024-11-18. If you have held a fund since before its manager's earliest published period, the figures for those years are not missing because they are nil. They are missing because they are not here, which is why a missing period is named rather than assumed to be zero everywhere in this calculator.

What this cannot tell you

• Not "the reporting funds". HMRC's reporting fund list is far larger than 2,755 share classes. This is what has been read from 8 managers' own published reports. It is not a random sample, so no proportion here should be read as a statement about the whole universe.
• No prices, so no percentages of NAV. The obvious question, whether USD 0.05 per unit is a lot, cannot be answered here. Answering it needs a unit price, and this project holds none. Per-unit figures are not comparable between funds and none are averaged across funds anywhere on this page.
• Nil means published zero. A period with no published figure is never counted as nil, here or in the calculator.

To look up one fund by ISIN rather than read about all of them, use the ERI lookup. For what to do with the figure once you have it, see when the income is actually taxed, which for most of these records is not the year you would guess.