DEFINED ASSET FUNDS MUNICIPAL INVT TR FD MULTISTATE SER 7K
497, 1994-04-19
Previous: COLLINS & AIKMAN HOLDINGS CORP/DE, S-2, 1994-04-19
Next: MUNICIPAL INCOME OPPORTUNITIES TRUST II, N-30D, 1994-04-19




          This Supplement is filed pursuant to Rule 497(d) with regard to
Defined Asset Funds-Municipal Investment Trust Fund, Multistate Series 7K.
The text of the supplement to the Prospectus dated October 22, 1993 is as
follows:




                       SUPPLEMENT DATED APRIL 19, 1994
                              TO PROSPECTUSES OF
                            DEFINED ASSET FUNDSSM
                       MUNICIPAL INVESTMENT TRUST FUND
                              MULTISTATE SERIES
                                1P, 1U, 1X, 2H
                    2L, 3G, 4F, 4K, 4N, 5L, 7K, 9I AND 9J
 
THE COLORADO TRUST
 
     RISK  FACTORS--Generally. The  portfolio of  the Colorado  Trust consists
primarily of obligations issued by or on  behalf of the State of Colorado  and
its   political  subdivisions.  The  State's  political  subdivisions  include
approximately 1,600 units of local government in Colorado, including counties,
statutory cities and  towns, home-rule cities  and counties, school  districts
and  a variety of  water, irrigation, and other  special districts and special
improvement districts, all with various constitutional and statutory authority
to levy taxes and incur indebtedness.
 
     Following is a brief summary of some of the factors which may affect  the
financial  condition of the State of  Colorado and its political subdivisions.
It is not a complete or comprehensive description of these factors or analysis
of financial conditions and may not  be indicative of the financial  condition
of  issuers of obligations contained in the portfolio of the Colorado Trust or
any particular  projects  financed  by those  obligations.  Many  factors  not
included   in  the  summary,   such  as  the   national  economy,  social  and
environmental policies  and conditions,  and  the national  and  international
markets  for petroleum, minerals  and metals, could have  an adverse impact on
the financial condition of the State and its political subdivisions, including
the issuers of obligations contained in  the portfolio of the Colorado  Trust.
It  is not possible  to predict whether  and to what  extent those factors may
affect the financial condition  of the State  and its political  subdivisions,
including  the  issuers  of  obligations contained  in  the  portfolio  of the
Colorado Trust.  Prospective  investors  should study  with  care  the  issues
contained  in  the  portfolio  of the  Colorado  Trust,  review  carefully the
information set  out in  Part B  of  the prospectus  under the  caption  'Risk
Factors'  and  consult with  their  investment advisors  as  to the  merits of
particular issues in the portfolio.
 
     The following summary  is based on  publicly available information  which
has not been independently verified by the Sponsor or its legal counsel.
 
     The  State Economy.  Among the  most significant  sectors of  the State's
economy are services, trade, manufacture of durable and non-durable goods  and
tourism.  Between late  1984 and mid-1987,  the State's  economy was adversely
affected by numerous factors, including  the contraction of the energy  sector
layoffs  by advanced technology firms and an excess supply of both residential
and nonresidential buildings causing employment in the construction sector  to
decline.  As  a  result  of  these  conditions,  certain  areas  of  the State
experienced particularly  high unemployment.  Furthermore,  in 1986,  for  the
first time in 32 years, job generation in the State was negative and, in 1986,
for the first time in 21 years, the State experienced negative migration, with
more people leaving the State than moving in.
 
     From  1987 through 1991, there was moderate but steady improvement in the
Colorado economy: per-capita income increased 27.6% (3.8% in 1992) and  retail
trade  sales increased 33.2% (8.2%  in 1992; 10.9% in  1993). Since that time,
the State economy has  shown stronger growth. The  State's economic growth  in
1993  is estimated to  have surpassed that of  the national economy. Migration
into the State rose 15.6% over 1992, with overall State population  increasing
approximately  2.9%. State employment increased 3.1% in 1993, compared to 1.4%
at the national level. An estimated 49,500 net new jobs were generated in  the
State  economy.  The State's  unemployment  rate remained  below  the national
unemployment rate.
 
     State Revenues. The State operates on a fiscal year beginning July 1  and
ending June 30. Fiscal year 1993 refers to the year ended June 30, 1993.
 
     The  State derives all of  its General Fund revenues  from taxes. The two
most important  sources  of  these  revenues  are  sales  and  use  taxes  and
individual  income taxes, which  accounted for approximately  28.9% and 51.0%,
respectively, of  total General  Fund revenues  during fiscal  year 1993.  The
Office  of State  Planning and  Budgeting estimates  that, during  fiscal year
1994, sales  and use  taxes  will account  for  approximately 31.2%  of  total
General   Fund  revenues  and   individual  income  taxes   will  account  for
approximately 54.3% of total  General Fund revenues.  The ending General  Fund
balance  for fiscal year 1992 was $133.3  million and for fiscal year 1993 was
$326.7 million.

<PAGE>
 
     The Colorado Constitution contains strict  limitations on the ability  of
the  State to  create debt  except under  certain very  limited circumstances.
However, the constitutional provision  has been interpreted  not to limit  the
ability  of the  State to  issue certain  obligations which  do not constitute
debt, including short-term obligations which  do not extend beyond the  fiscal
year  in  which they  are incurred  and lease  purchase obligations  which are
subject to annual appropriation. Nevertheless, following passage by the  votes
of  the State of a tax and spending limitation amendment, described below, the
General Assembly adopted legislation prohibiting the State from entering  into
contracts  for the  purchase or  lease of  real or  personal property  if such
contract involves  the  issuance of  certificates  of participation  or  other
similar  instruments, until a court of  competent jurisdiction renders a final
decision as to the constitutionality  of such instruments. See the  discussion
below under 'Tax and Spending Limitation Amendment.'
 
     The  State is  authorized pursuant to  State statute  to issue short-term
notes to alleviate temporary  cash flow shortfalls. The  most recent issue  of
such  notes, issued on July 6, 1993 and maturing June 27, 1994, were given the
highest rating  available  for short-term  obligations  by Standard  &  Poor's
Corporation  and Fitch Investors Service, Inc. A  rating on such notes was not
requested from, and  consequently no  rating was given  by, Moody's  Investors
Service,  Inc. Because of  the short-term nature of  such notes, their ratings
should not  be  considered  necessarily  indicative  of  the  State's  general
financial  condition.  It  is  expected  that  the  State  will  issue similar
short-term notes shortly after July 1, 1994, the beginning of the State's 1994
fiscal year.
 
     Tax and Spending Limitation Amendment. On November 3, 1992, the  Colorado
voters  approved  a  State  constitutional  amendment  (the  'Amendment') that
restricts the ability of  the State and local  governments to increase  taxes,
revenues,  debt  and  spending.  The Amendment  provides  that  its provisions
supersede conflicting State constitutional, State statutory, charter or  other
State or local provisions.
 
     The  provisions of the Amendment apply  to 'districts,' which are defined
in  the  Amendment  as  the  State  or  any  local  government,  with  certain
exclusions.  Under the terms of the Amendment, districts must have prior voter
approval to  impose  any new  tax,  tax  rate increase,  mill  levy  increase,
valuation  for assessment  ratio increase  and extension  of an  expiring tax.
Prior  voter   approval  is   also  required,   except  in   certain   limited
circumstances,  for  the  creation  of  'any  multiple-fiscal  year  direct or
indirect  district  debt  or  other  financial  obligations.'  The   Amendment
prescribes  the  timing  and  procedures for  any  elections  required  by the
Amendment. Litigation has been filed, and is in various stages of proceedings,
against a number  of Colorado municipalities,  counties and school  districts,
under which the plaintiffs claim various procedural and substantive violations
of  the Amendment in the conduct of the elections held in such municipalities,
counties and school districts on November 2, 1993. One of the school  district
cases  has  been  accepted,  after  the  opinion  of  the  District  Court was
delivered, for review by the State Supreme Court.
 
     Because  the  Amendment's  voter  approval  requirements  apply  to   any
'multiple  fiscal year'  debt or financial  obligation, short-term obligations
which do not  extend beyond the  fiscal year  in which they  are incurred  are
treated  as exempt from the voter approval requirements of the Amendment. Case
law prior to  the adoption  of the  Amendment determined  that lease  purchase
obligations  subject to annual appropriation do  not constitute debt under the
Colorado constitution. Litigation is pending in the State concerning whether a
proposed lease which is subject to annual appropriation is a  'multiple-fiscal
year direct or indirect debt' under the Amendment, and consequently subject to
the voter approval requirements of the Amendment.
 
     The   Amendment's  voter  approval  requirements  and  other  limitations
(discussed in the  following paragraph)  do not apply  to 'enterprises'  which
term  is defined  to include  government-owned businesses  authorized to issue
their own revenue bonds  and receiving under 10%  of annual revenue in  grants
from  all  Colorado state  and local  governments combined.  Enterprise status
under the  Amendment has  been and  is likely  to continue  to be  subject  to
legislative and judicial interpretation.
 
     Among  other  provisions,  the Amendment  requires  the  establishment of
emergency reserves, limits increases in district revenues and limits increases
in district fiscal  year spending. As  a general matter,  annual State  fiscal
year  spending may change no more than inflation plus the percentage change in
State population in the prior calendar year. Annual local district fiscal year
spending may change  no more than  inflation in the  prior calendar year  plus
annual  local growth, as defined in and subject to the adjustments provided in
the Amendment.  The  Amendment  provides that  annual  district  property  tax
revenues  may change no  more than inflation  in the prior  calendar year plus
annual local growth, as defined in and subject to the adjustments provided  in
the Amendment. District revenues in excess of

<PAGE>
 
the limits prescribed by the Amendment are required, absent voter approval, to
be  refunded by any reasonable method, including temporary tax credits or rate
reductions. In  addition,  the  Amendment  prohibits  new  or  increased  real
property  transfer taxes, new State real property taxes and new local district
income taxes. The Amendment also provides that a local district may reduce  or
end  its subsidiary to any program  (other than public education through grade
12 or  as required  by  federal law)  delegated to  it  by the  State  General
Assembly for administration.
 
     This  description is not intended to constitute a complete description of
all of the provisions of the  Amendment. Many provisions of the Amendment  are
ambiguous  and will require judicial  interpretation. Several statutes enacted
during the  1993  legislative  session and  legislation  proposed  during  the
pending  1994 legislative  session attempt to  clarify the  application of the
Amendment with  respect  to  certain  governmental  entities  and  activities.
However,  many provisions of  the Amendment are  likely to continue  to be the
subject of further legislation of judicial proceedings. The application of the
Amendment may adversely affect the  financial condition and operations of  the
State  and  local  govenments  in  the State  to  an  extent  which  cannot be
predicted. Litigation attempting to apply the provisions of the Amendment in a
manner which  would affect  general obligations  of a  school district  issued
prior to the approval of the Amendment was commenced in 1993. In December 1993
the  District  Court  before  which this  litigation  was  pending  issued its
opinion, among  others,  that the  school  district could  increase  its  debt
service  mill levy to provide for the debt service on such general obligations
without additional, post-Amendment, voter approval and without decreasing  its
general  revenue mill levy. This case has  been appealed to the State Court of
Appeals.
 
COLORADO TAXES
 
     In the opinion of  Becker Stowe Bowles &  Lynch P.C., special counsel  on
Colorado  tax matters, under existing Colorado law and for Colorado income tax
purposes only:
 
        1.  The  Colorado Trust will  be treated as  a trust and  will not  be
     taxable as a corporation. Income of the Colorado Trust will be treated as
     income  of the Holders of Units of  the Colorado Trust in the same manner
     as for Federal income tax purposes.
 
        2.  Each  Holder of Units  of the  Colorado Trust will  be treated  as
     receiving  his or her pro rata share  of interest on each Debt Obligation
     in the Colorado Trust when it is received by the Colorado Trust. Interest
     on Debt  Obligations in  the Colorado  Trust that  would be  exempt  from
     Colorado  income tax  if paid  directly to  a Holder  will be  treated as
     exempt from Colorado income tax when  received by the Colorado Trust  and
     distributed to the Holders of Units of the Colorado Trust.
 
        3.   Each  Holder of Units  of the  Colorado Trust will  be treated as
     recognizing gain  or loss  when the  Colorado Trust  disposes of  a  Debt
     Obligation  or when the Holder disposes of all or a portion of his or her
     Units, whether by sale, exchange,  redemption or payment at maturity,  in
     the  same manner as for  Federal income tax purposes.  The amount of such
     gain or loss is  determined by reference  to the amount  of such gain  or
     loss for Federal income tax purposes.
 
        4.   Interest on indebtness incurred or continued by a Holder of Units
     of the Colorado Trust to purchase  or carry such Units is not  deductible
     for  Colorado income tax purposes to the  extent it is not deductible for
     Federal income tax purposes.
 
     The foregoing  opinions  concerning Colorado  income  tax apply  only  to
Holders who are individuals and have been made in reliance upon the opinion of
Davis  Polk  & Wardwell  concerning the  Federal income  tax treatment  of the
Colorado Trust and the Holders of its Units.







© 2022 IncJournal is not affiliated with or endorsed by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission