这种避税方案的利益严重偏向极富裕的投资者。Bloomberg 的估计显示，前 1% 的美国家庭获得了 39.6% 的税收利益，平均每年节省 12,862 美元，而中等收入家庭仅节省 23 美元。对于拥有 1 亿美元 ETF 投资组合的个人，每年的平均避税额为 682,000 美元。像 Rabih Moussawi 这样的学者指出，该机制有利于那些能够长期存放资金的人，而中产阶级储蓄者通常透过税收优惠的退休帐户持有共同基金，这些帐户并不能从该漏洞中受益。
在 Paul Atkins 领导下的证券交易委员会（SEC）允许 Dimensional Fund Advisors 等大型资产管理公司将 ETF 份额附加到现有的共同基金之后，这种避税行为将进一步扩大。如果整个共同基金行业都采用这种结构，每年可能会额外延后或避免 400 亿美元的税收，其中个人为 350 亿美元，企业为 40 亿美元。尽管投资公司协会（ICI）等行业组织辩称该豁免是长期储蓄的激励措施，但 Steven Hodaszy 和 Daniel Hemel 等批评者将其描述为对富人的意外且不合理的补贴，国家已无法再承受。
The exchange-traded fund (ETF) tax loophole, primarily utilizing "heartbeat" trades to swap appreciated assets without triggering capital gains taxes, currently costs the US Treasury an estimated $48 billion annually. This loss has escalated alongside the ETF market's expansion to nearly $15 trillion in assets. Following a 2019 regulatory change allowing all ETFs to use custom baskets, heartbeat trades—symmetrical inflows and outflows—surged to average 9% of all net daily outflows since 2017. Active ETFs are particularly reliant on this strategy, with heartbeats representing 18% of their daily outflows last year compared to 9% for passive index funds.
The benefits of this tax avoidance scheme are heavily skewed toward ultra-wealthy investors. Bloomberg estimates indicate that the top 1% of American households receive 39.6% of the tax benefits, saving an average of $12,862 annually, while middle-income households save a mere $23. For individuals with a $100 million ETF portfolio, the yearly tax savings average $682,000. Scholars like Rabih Moussawi point out that the mechanism favors those who can park capital for long horizons, whereas middle-class savers frequently hold mutual funds through tax-advantaged retirement accounts that do not benefit from this loophole.
This tax avoidance is set to expand after the SEC, under Paul Atkins, permitted major asset managers like Dimensional Fund Advisors to add ETF classes to existing mutual funds. If the entire mutual fund industry adopts this structure, it could defer or avoid an additional $40 billion in taxes annually, including $35 billion for individuals and $4 billion for businesses. While industry groups like the Investment Company Institute defend the exemption as an incentive for long-term saving, critics like Steven Hodaszy and Daniel Hemel describe it as an accidental, unjustifiable subsidy for the wealthy that the nation can no longer afford.