Putnam
Master Intermediate
Income Trust

Semiannual report
3 | 31 | 14

Consider these risks before investing: International investing involves currency, economic, and political risks. Emerging-market securities carry illiquidity and volatility risks. Lower-rated bonds may offer higher yields in return for more risk. Bond investments are subject to interest-rate risk (the risk of bond prices falling if interest rates rise) and credit risk (the risk of an issuer defaulting on interest or principal payments). Interest-rate risk is greater for longer-term bonds, and credit risk is greater for below-investment-grade bonds. Unlike bonds, funds that invest in bonds have fees and expenses. Bond prices may fall or fail to rise over time for several reasons, including general financial market conditions and factors related to a specific issuer or industry. Funds that invest in government securities are not guaranteed. Mortgage-backed securities are subject to prepayment risk and the risk that they may increase in value less when interest rates decline and decline in value more when interest rates rise. You can lose money by investing in the fund. The fund’s shares trade on a stock exchange at market prices, which may be lower than the fund’s net asset value.

Message from the Trustees

Dear Fellow Shareholder:

While U.S. stocks and bonds have generally delivered modest returns so far in 2014, volatility has become more pronounced, driven in the early months of the year by unusually cold weather conditions, shifting expectations for U.S. Federal Reserve action, and rising geopolitical fears. Still, evidence exists that global economic growth is slowly strengthening, and we believe the United States, Europe, and Japan are poised to contribute to an extended recovery.

In our view, portfolio diversification becomes extraordinarily important in this kind of environment. Putnam’s active research and investment strategies can serve investors who are pursuing income and capital appreciation goals.

We believe Putnam’s sound investment strategies can provide benefits to your portfolio. An experienced advisor can help you assess your individual needs, time horizon, and risk tolerance — and can help guide you toward your investment goals.

As always, thank you for investing with Putnam.

Data are historical. Past performance does not guarantee future results. More recent returns may be less or more than those shown. Investment return and net asset value will fluctuate, and you may have a gain or a loss when you sell your shares. Performance assumes reinvestment of distributions and does not account for taxes. Fund returns in the bar chart are at NAV. See pages 5 and 12–13 for additional performance information, including fund returns at market price. Index and Lipper results should be compared with fund performance at NAV. Lipper calculates performance differently than the closed-end funds it ranks, due to varying methods for determining a fund’s monthly reinvestment NAV.

* Returns for the six-month period are not annualized, but cumulative.

Interview with your fund’s portfolio manager

Bill, what was the bond market environment like during the six months ended March 31, 2014?

Overall, it was a favorable environment for taking credit and prepayment risk, but there were occasions of volatility. The period began on a note of uncertainty concerning congressional debate about the U.S. debt ceiling and a partial shutdown of the federal government. However, on October 17, 2013, President Obama signed a short-term bill that suspended the debt ceiling and funded the government through mid-January 2014, to end the government shutdown. The debt-ceiling issue was ultimately resolved in February 2014.

At its December policy meeting, the Federal Reserve surprised investors to some extent by announcing the first reduction in its bond-buying program somewhat earlier than the market was anticipating. The Fed agreed to lower its $85-billion-per-month pace of purchases by $10 billion beginning in January, citing improving labor-market conditions as its rationale. Bond yields spiked on the news, with the yield on the benchmark 10-year U.S. Treasury reaching 3.04% by year-end.

In January, with the central bank beginning the process of reducing its bond buying, lackluster economic data — most notably a disappointing reading on the Institute for Supply Management’s [ISM] Purchasing Managers Index — coupled with concern

This comparison shows your fund’s performance in the context of broad market indexes for the six months ended 3/31/14. See pages 4 and 12–13 for additional fund performance information. Index descriptions can be found on page 14.

about emerging-market [EM] currencies, caused investors to assume a more risk-averse posture. Asset flows shifted toward the relative safety of U.S. Treasuries, pushing the yield on the 10-year note down to 2.67%, its lowest level since mid-November. By February, however, with EM stress abating, market participants were encouraged by the resiliency of U.S. stocks as well as lower Treasury yields. Credit markets were also buoyed by investors largely dismissing weak economic data as a function of severe weather affecting some of the country’s most densely populated regions, and by the fact that the crisis in Ukraine remained localized.

The fund generated a solid return at net asset value for the six-month period. What factors fueled this favorable outcome?

Our prepayment and mortgage credit strategies were the biggest contributors to performance. We implemented our prepayment strategies with securities such as interest-only collateralized mortgage obligations [IO CMOs]. Lower policy risk coupled with mortgage rates that remained at elevated levels versus the past couple of years reduced the likelihood that the mortgages underlying our CMO holdings would be refinanced. As a result, slower prepayment speeds bolstered the securities’ values. Additionally, the fund was helped by our overall strategy of positioning the portfolio for higher mortgage rates.

Credit qualities are shown as a percentage of the fund’s net assets as of 3/31/14. A bond rated Baa or higher (Prime-3 or higher, for short-term debt) is considered investment grade. The chart reflects Moody’s ratings; percentages may include bonds or derivatives not rated by Moody’s but rated by Standard & Poor’s (S&P) or, if unrated by S&P, by Fitch ratings, and then included in the closest equivalent Moody’s rating. Ratings may vary over time.

Credit quality includes bonds and represents only the fixed-income portion of the portfolio. Cash and net other assets, if any, represent the market value weights of cash, derivatives, short-term securities, and other unclassified assets in the portfolio. The fund itself has not been rated by an independent rating agency.

Cash positions may represent collateral used to cover certain derivative contracts.

Within mortgage credit, our holdings of commercial mortgage-backed securities [CMBS] and non-agency residential mortgage-backed securities [RMBS] were also major contributors. Within CMBS, the fund benefited from solid security selection in subordinated “mezzanine” bonds rated BBB/Baa, which offered higher yields at what we believed were acceptable risks. Mezzanine CMBS are lower in the capital structure of a package of securities backed by commercial mortgages, and provide a yield advantage over higher-rated bonds along with meaningful principal protection. Our non-agency RMBS investments rebounded from undervalued levels prior to the period, buoyed by investor demand for higher-yielding securities.

Elsewhere, our positions in high-yield corporate bonds provided a further boost to the fund’s return, as the asset class gained due to solid corporate fundamentals and consistent investor demand.

Overseas, security selection in EM debt moderately contributed to performance. The fund benefited most from investments in Argentina, where we held U.S.-dollar-denominated bonds.

This table shows the fund’s top holdings across three key sectors and the percentage of the fund’s net assets that each represented as of 3/31/14. Short-term holdings and derivatives, if any, are excluded. Holdings may vary over time.

How was the fund positioned with respect to interest-rate sensitivity?

The fund was defensively positioned for a rising-rate environment, as its duration was negative on a net basis, particularly in the intermediate, 5- to 10-year portion of the Treasury yield curve. Rates in this portion of the curve are currently being dampened by Fed bond buying, and we believe intermediate-term rates will begin to rise as the central bank continues to reduce its bond purchases. Outside the United States, we had a long-duration position in Greece, as rates there continued to decline, which we held against a net short position in Germany, where rates remained low. All told, the fund’s duration and yield-curve positioning meaningfully aided performance for the period, led by our non-U.S. strategy.

How did your currency strategy affect performance?

Beneficial exposure to the euro and the Canadian dollar was more than offset by a negative return in the Brazilian real. As a result, our currency strategy was a modest detractor.

During 2013, we significantly reduced the fund’s currency risk by cutting back most of our active foreign currency positions. We felt this was prudent in light of heightened volatility in foreign-exchange markets.

This chart shows how the fund’s top weightings have changed over the past six months. Allocations are shown as a percentage of the fund’s net assets. Cash and net other assets, if any, represent the market value weights of cash, derivatives, short-term securities, and other unclassified assets in the portfolio. Current period summary information may differ from the portfolio schedule included in the financial statements due to the inclusion of derivative securities, any interest accruals, and the use of different classifications of securities for presentation purposes. Holdings and allocations may vary over time.

Cash positions may represent collateral used to cover certain derivative contracts.

How did you use derivatives during the period?

We used bond futures and interest-rate swaps to take tactical positions at various points along the yield curve. We also employed interest-rate swaps and “swaptions” — which give us the option to enter into a swap contract — to hedge the interest-rate risk associated with our CMO holdings. Additionally, we used total return swaps as a hedging tool and to help manage the fund’s sector exposure, as well as credit default swaps to hedge the fund’s credit risk. Lastly, we utilized currency forward contracts to hedge the foreign exchange risk associated with non-U.S. bonds.

What is your outlook for the coming months, and how are you positioning the fund?

In our view, Treasury yields, particularly in the intermediate part of the yield curve, are likely to move higher in 2014 as the U.S. economy continues to strengthen. However, we don’t believe rates are likely to rise so quickly that the shift will undermine economic growth. What’s more, we expect to see an improving U.S. growth trend reflected in Europe and in developing Asian countries.

In addition to weather, a significant inventory overhang was another factor in the weak economic readings we saw early this year, and we believe it will take some time for this surplus to work its way through the system. In 2013’s third quarter, gross domestic product [GDP] was much stronger than anticipated, and fourth-quarter 2013 GDP was firmer than originally forecast, leading manufacturers to expand their inventories. However, the weather-related slowdown in the first quarter left manufacturers with excess inventory. Consequently, when growth picks up, the economy won’t immediately need production to sustain inventories, meaning it likely won’t get the cyclical boost it otherwise would if inventories were at a more normal

ABOUT DERIVATIVES

Derivatives are an increasingly common type of investment instrument, the performance of which is derived from an underlying security, index, currency, or other area of the capital markets. Derivatives employed by the fund’s managers generally serve one of two main purposes: to implement a strategy that may be difficult or more expensive to invest in through traditional securities, or to hedge unwanted risk associated with a particular position.

For example, the fund’s managers might use currency forward contracts to capitalize on an anticipated change in exchange rates between two currencies. This approach would require a significantly smaller outlay of capital than purchasing traditional bonds denominated in the underlying currencies. In another example, the managers may identify a bond that they believe is undervalued relative to its risk of default, but may seek to reduce the interest-rate risk of that bond by using interest-rate swaps, a derivative through which two parties “swap” payments based on the movement of certain rates.

Like any other investment, derivatives may not appreciate in value and may lose money. Derivatives may amplify traditional investment risks through the creation of leverage and may be less liquid than traditional securities. And because derivatives typically represent contractual agreements between two financial institutions, derivatives entail “counterparty risk,” which is the risk that the other party is unable or unwilling to pay. Putnam monitors the counterparty risks we assume. For example, Putnam often enters into collateral agreements that require the counterparties to post collateral on a regular basis to cover their obligations to the fund.

level, in our view. Additionally, the launch of the Affordable Care Act has placed a drag on growth by requiring lower-paid individuals to spend more for health care.

Looking at the Fed, bond investors have been willing to give the central bank leeway to pursue a fairly aggressive stimulus policy. But this leeway is heavily dependent on maintaining low inflation, particularly in the area of wages. Currently, the Fed believes the non-accelerating inflation rate of unemployment [NAIRU] — the rate to which unemployment can fall without triggering wage inflation — is between 5.2% and 5.6%. However, our research suggests, and some institutions also are of the opinion, that the NAIRU may be significantly higher than this, primarily because of various structural problems hampering the labor participation rate, particularly in the younger demographic. As the unemployment rate moves downward, if wage inflation develops earlier than the Fed is anticipating, we could see the central bank reducing its stimulus efforts much faster than the markets are currently forecasting, which could lead to increased yield-curve volatility. In order to position the portfolio for this potential risk, we have an underweight position relative to the benchmark in the 2- to 5-year portion of the yield curve, since that is the area of the curve that we believe would be most affected by adjustments in current Fed policy. Additionally, we have been minimizing interest-rate risk in the portfolio.

As for other aspects of portfolio positioning, we have maintained a diversified exposure to CMBS and CMOs; we have liked specific areas of the non-agency RMBS market; and while we remain generally positive in our outlook for credit risk, we have been taking an opportunistic approach to the high-yield market.

Thanks for your time and for bringing us up to date, Bill.

The views expressed in this report are exclusively those of Putnam Management and are subject to change. They are not meant as investment advice.

Please note that the holdings discussed in this report may not have been held by the fund for the entire period. Portfolio composition is subject to review in accordance with the fund’s investment strategy and may vary in the future. Current and future portfolio holdings are subject to risk.

Portfolio Manager D. William Kohli is Co-Head of Fixed Income at Putnam. He has an M.B.A. from the Haas School of Business at the University of California, Berkeley, and a B.A. from the University of California, San Diego. Bill joined Putnam in 1994 and has been in the investment industry since 1986.

In addition to Bill, your fund’s portfolio managers are Michael J. Atkin, Kevin F. Murphy, Michael V. Salm, and Paul D. Scanlon, CFA.

HOW CLOSED-END FUNDS DIFFER FROM OPEN-END FUNDS

Closed-end funds and open-end funds share many common characteristics but also have some key differences that you should understand as you consider your portfolio strategies.

More assets at work Open-end funds are subject to ongoing sales and redemptions that can generate transaction costs for long-term shareholders. Closed-end funds, however, are typically fixed pools of capital that do not need to hold cash in connection with sales and redemptions, allowing the funds to keep more assets actively invested.

Traded like stocks Closed-end fund shares are traded on stock exchanges and, as a result, their prices fluctuate because of the influence of several factors.

They have a market price Like an open-end fund, a closed-end fund has a per-share net asset value (NAV). However, closed-end funds also have a “market price” for their shares — which is how much you pay when you buy shares of the fund, and how much you receive when you sell them.

When looking at a closed-end fund’s performance, you will usually see that the NAV and the market price differ. The market price can be influenced by several factors that cause it to vary from the NAV, including fund distributions, changes in supply and demand for the fund’s shares, changing market conditions, and investor perceptions of the fund or its investment manager. A fund’s performance at market price typically differs from its results at NAV.

Your fund’s performance

This section shows your fund’s performance, price, and distribution information for periods ended March 31, 2014, the end of the first half of its current fiscal year. Performance should always be considered in light of a fund’s investment strategy. Data represent past performance. Past performance does not guarantee future results. More recent returns may be less or more than those shown. Investment return, net asset value, and market price will fluctuate, and you may have a gain or a loss when you sell your shares.

Fund performance Total return for periods ended 3/31/14

Performance assumes reinvestment of distributions and does not account for taxes.

Comparative index returns For periods ended 3/31/14

Index and Lipper results should be compared with fund performance at net asset value. Lipper calculates performance differently than the closed-end funds it ranks, due to varying methods for determining a fund’s monthly reinvestment net asset value.

* Over the 6-month, 1-year, 3-year, 5-year, 10-year, and life-of-fund periods ended 3/31/14, there were 30, 28, 23, 19, 16, and 4 funds, respectively, in this Lipper category.

† The JPMorgan Global High Yield Index was introduced on 12/31/93, which post-dates the fund’s inception.

Fund price and distribution information For the six-month period ended 3/31/14

The classification of distributions, if any, is an estimate. Final distribution information will appear on your year-end tax forms.

* Most recent distribution, excluding capital gains, annualized and divided by NAV or market price at end of period.

Terms and definitions

Important terms

Total return shows how the value of the fund’s shares changed over time, assuming you held the shares through the entire period and reinvested all distributions in the fund.

Net asset value (NAV) is the value of all your fund’s assets, minus any liabilities, divided by the number of outstanding shares.

Market price is the current trading price of one share of the fund. Market prices are set by transactions between buyers and sellers on exchanges such as the New York Stock Exchange.

Fixed-income terms

Current yield is the annual rate of return earned from dividends or interest of an investment. Current yield is expressed as a percentage of the price of a security, fund share, or principal investment.

Mortgage-backed security (MBS), also known as a mortgage “pass-through”, is a type of asset-backed security that is secured by a mortgage or collection of mortgages. The following are types of MBSs:

• Agency “pass-through” has its principal and interest backed by a U.S. government agency, such as the Federal National Mortgage Association (Fannie Mae), Government National Mortgage Association (Ginnie Mae), and Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (Freddie Mac).

• Collateralized mortgage obligation (CMO) represents claims to specific cash flows from pools of home mortgages. The streams of principal and interest payments on the mortgages are distributed to the different classes of CMO interests in “tranches”. Each tranche may have different principal balances, coupon rates, prepayment risks, and maturity dates. A CMO is highly sensitive to changes in interest rates and any resulting change in the rate at which homeowners sell their properties, refinance, or otherwise prepay loans. CMOs are subject to prepayment, market, and liquidity risks.

• Interest-only (IO) security is a type of CMO in which the underlying asset is the interest portion of mortgage, Treasury, or bond payments.

• Non-agency residential mortgage-backed security (RMBS) is an MBS not backed by Fannie Mae, Ginnie Mae, or Freddie Mac. One type of RMBS is an Alt-A mortgage-backed security.

• Commercial mortgage-backed security (CMBS) is secured by the loan on a commercial property.

Yield curve is a graph that plots the yields of bonds with equal credit quality against their differing maturity dates, ranging from shortest to longest. It is used as a benchmark for other debt, such as mortgage or bank lending rates.

Comparative indexes

Barclays Government/Credit Bond Index is an unmanaged index of U.S. Treasuries, agency securities, and investment-grade corporate bonds.

Barclays U.S. Aggregate Bond Index is an unmanaged index of U.S. investment-grade fixed-income securities.

BofA (Bank of America) Merrill Lynch U.S.

3-Month Treasury Bill Index is an unmanaged index that seeks to measure the performance of U.S. Treasury bills available in the marketplace.

S&P 500 Index is an unmanaged index of common stock performance.

Indexes assume reinvestment of all distributions and do not account for fees. Securities and performance of a fund and an index will differ. You cannot invest directly in an index.

Lipper is a third-party industry-ranking entity that ranks mutual funds. Its rankings do not reflect sales charges. Lipper rankings are based on total return at net asset value relative to other funds that have similar current investment styles or objectives as determined by Lipper. Lipper may change a fund’s category assignment at its discretion. Lipper category averages reflect performance trends for funds within a category.

Other information for shareholders

Important notice regarding share repurchase program

In September 2013, the Trustees of your fund approved the renewal of a share repurchase program that had been in effect since 2005. This renewal will allow your fund to repurchase, in the 12 months beginning October 8, 2013, up to 10% of the fund’s common shares outstanding as of October 7, 2013.

Important notice regarding delivery of shareholder documents

In accordance with Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) regulations, Putnam sends a single copy of annual and semiannual shareholder reports, prospectuses, and proxy statements to Putnam shareholders who share the same address, unless a shareholder requests otherwise. If you prefer to receive your own copy of these documents, please call Putnam at 1-800-225-1581, and Putnam will begin sending individual copies within 30 days.

Proxy voting

Putnam is committed to managing our mutual funds in the best interests of our shareholders. The Putnam funds’ proxy voting guidelines and procedures, as well as information regarding how your fund voted proxies relating to portfolio securities during the 12-month period ended June 30, 2013, are available in the Individual Investors section of putnam.com, and on the SEC’s website, www.sec.gov. If you have questions about finding forms on the SEC’s website, you may call the SEC at 1-800-SEC-0330. You may also obtain the Putnam funds’ proxy voting guidelines and procedures at no charge by calling Putnam’s Shareholder Services at 1-800-225-1581.

Fund portfolio holdings

The fund will file a complete schedule of its portfolio holdings with the SEC for the first and third quarters of each fiscal year on Form N-Q. Shareholders may obtain the fund’s Forms N-Q on the SEC’s website at www.sec.gov. In addition, the fund’s Forms N-Q may be reviewed and copied at the SEC’s Public Reference Room in Washington, D.C. You may call the SEC at 1-800-SEC-0330 for information about the SEC’s website or the operation of the Public Reference Room.

Trustee and employee fund ownership

Putnam employees and members of the Board of Trustees place their faith, confidence, and, most importantly, investment dollars in Putnam mutual funds. As of March 31, 2014, Putnam employees had approximately $461,000,000 and the Trustees had approximately $109,000,000 invested in Putnam mutual funds. These amounts include investments by the Trustees’ and employees’ immediate family members as well as investments through retirement and deferred compensation plans.

Summary of Putnam Closed-End Funds’ Amended and Restated Dividend Reinvestment Plan

Putnam High Income Securities Fund, Putnam Managed Municipal Income Trust, Putnam Master Intermediate Income Trust, Putnam Municipal Opportunities Trust and Putnam Premier Income Trust (each, a “Fund” and collectively, the “Funds”) each offer a dividend reinvestment plan (each, a “Plan” and collectively, the “Plans”). If you participate in a Plan, all income dividends and capital gain distributions are automatically reinvested in Fund shares by the Fund’s agent, Putnam Investor Services, Inc. (the “Agent”). If you are not participating in a Plan, every month you will receive all dividends and other distributions in cash, paid by check and mailed directly to you.

Upon a purchase (or, where applicable, upon registration of transfer on the shareholder records of a Fund) of shares of a Fund by a registered shareholder, each such shareholder will be deemed to have elected to participate in that Fund’s Plan. Each such shareholder will have all distributions by a Fund automatically reinvested in additional shares, unless such shareholder elects to terminate participation in a Plan by instructing the Agent to pay future distributions in cash. Shareholders who were not participants in a Plan as of January 31, 2010, will continue to receive distributions in cash but may enroll in a Plan at any time by contacting the Agent.

If you participate in a Fund’s Plan, the Agent will automatically reinvest subsequent distributions, and the Agent will send you a confirmation in the mail telling you how many additional shares were issued to your account.

To change your enrollment status or to request additional information about the Plans, you may contact the Agent either in writing, at P.O. Box 8383, Boston, MA 02266-8383, or by telephone at 1-800-225-1581 during normal East Coast business hours.

How you acquire additional shares through a Plan If the market price per share for your Fund’s shares (plus estimated brokerage commissions) is greater than or equal to their net asset value per share on the payment date for a distribution, you will be issued shares of the Fund at a value equal to the higher of the net asset value per share on that date or 95% of the market price per share on that date.

If the market price per share for your Fund’s shares (plus estimated brokerage commissions) is less than their net asset value per share on the payment date for a distribution, the Agent will buy Fund shares for participating accounts in the open market. The Agent will aggregate open-market purchases on behalf of all participants, and the average price (including brokerage commissions) of all shares purchased by the Agent will be the price per share allocable to each participant. The Agent will generally complete these open-market purchases within five business days following the payment date. If, before the Agent has completed open-market purchases, the market price per share (plus estimated brokerage commissions) rises to exceed the net asset value per share on the payment date, then the purchase price may exceed the net asset value per share, potentially resulting in the acquisition of fewer shares than if the distribution had been paid in newly issued shares.

How to withdraw from a Plan Participants may withdraw from a Fund’s Plan at any time by notifying the Agent, either in writing or by telephone. Such withdrawal will be effective immediately if notice is received by the Agent with sufficient time prior to any distribution record date; otherwise, such withdrawal will be effective with respect to any subsequent

distribution following notice of withdrawal. There is no penalty for withdrawing from or not participating in a Plan.

Plan administration The Agent will credit all shares acquired for a participant under a Plan to the account in which the participant’s common shares are held. Each participant will be sent reasonably promptly a confirmation by the Agent of each acquisition made for his or her account.

About brokerage fees Each participant pays a proportionate share of any brokerage commissions incurred if the Agent purchases additional shares on the open market, in accordance with the Plans. There are no brokerage charges applied to shares issued directly by the Funds under the Plans.

About taxes and Plan amendments

Reinvesting dividend and capital gain distributions in shares of the Funds does not relieve you of tax obligations, which are the same as if you had received cash distributions. The Agent supplies tax information to you and to the IRS annually. Each Fund reserves the right to amend or terminate its Plan upon 30 days’ written notice. However, the Agent may assign its rights, and delegate its duties, to a successor agent with the prior consent of a Fund and without prior notice to Plan participants.

If your shares are held in a broker or nominee name If your shares are held in the name of a broker or nominee offering a dividend reinvestment service, consult your broker or nominee to ensure that an appropriate election is made on your behalf. If the broker or nominee holding your shares does not provide a reinvestment service, you may need to register your shares in your own name in order to participate in a Plan.

In the case of record shareholders such as banks, brokers or nominees that hold shares for others who are the beneficial owners of such shares, the Agent will administer the Plan on the basis of the number of shares certified by the record shareholder as representing the total amount registered in such shareholder’s name and held for the account of beneficial owners who are to participate in the Plan.

Trustee approval of management contract

Putnam Investment Management (“Putnam Management”) serves as investment manager to your fund under a management contract. In addition, Putnam Management’s affiliate, Putnam Investments Limited (“PIL”), provides services to your fund under a sub-management contract between Putnam Management and PIL. Putnam Management is majority owned (directly and indirectly) by Power Corporation of Canada, a diversified international management and holding company with interests in companies in the financial services, communications and other business sectors. Until his death on October 8, 2013, The Honourable Paul G. Desmarais, both directly and through holding companies, controlled a majority of the voting shares of Power Corporation of Canada. Upon his death, Mr. Desmarais’ voting control of shares of Power Corporation of Canada was transferred to The Desmarais Family Residuary Trust (the “Transfer”). As a technical matter, the Transfer may have constituted an “assignment” within the meaning of the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended (the “1940 Act”), causing your fund’s existing management and sub-management contracts to terminate automatically. On October 18, 2013, the Trustees, including all of the Trustees who are not “interested persons” (as this term is defined in the 1940 Act) of the Putnam funds (the “Independent Trustees”), approved interim management contracts between the Putnam funds and Putnam Management and the continuance of your fund’s sub-management contract to address this possibility and to avoid disruption of investment advisory and other services provided to the Putnam funds. At a subsequent meeting on November 22, 2013, the Trustees, including all of the Independent Trustees, approved new definitive management contracts between the Putnam funds and Putnam Management and determined to recommend their approval to the shareholders of the Putnam funds at a shareholder meeting called for February 27, 2014. The Trustees also approved new sub-management contracts, to be effective at the same time as the new definitive management contracts. The fund’s shareholders approved your fund’s new management contract at a special meeting on February 27, 2014.

In considering whether to approve your fund’s interim management contract and the continuance of your fund’s sub-management contract in October, and in considering whether to approve your fund’s new definitive management contract and its new sub-management contract in November, the Trustees took into account that they had recently approved the continuation (through June 30, 2014) of the fund’s previous management and sub-management contracts at their meeting in June 2013. The Trustees considered that the terms of the interim management contract and new definitive management contract were identical to those of the previous management contract, except for the effective dates and initial terms and for certain non-substantive changes. They also considered that the terms of the sub-management contract were identical to those of the previous sub-management contract, except for the effective dates and initial terms. In light of the substantial similarity between the proposed contracts and the previous versions of these contracts approved by the Trustees at their June 2013 meeting, the Trustees relied to a considerable extent on their review of these contracts in connection with their June meeting. In addition, the Trustees considered a number other factors relating to the Transfer, including, but not limited to, the following:

• Information about the operations of The Desmarais Family Residuary Trust, including that Paul Desmarais, Jr. and André Desmarais,

Mr. Desmarais’ sons, were expected to exercise, jointly, voting control over the Power Corporation of Canada shares controlled by The Desmarais Family Residuary Trust.

• That Paul Desmarais, Jr. and André Desmarais had been playing active managerial roles at Power Corporation of Canada, with responsibility for the oversight of Power Corporation of Canada’s subsidiaries, including Putnam Investments, since Power Corporation of Canada had acquired Putnam Investments in 2007, including serving as Directors of Putnam Investments, and that the Transfer would not affect their responsibilities as officers of Power Corporation of Canada.

• The intention expressed by representatives of Power Corporation of Canada and its subsidiaries, Power Financial Corporation and Great-West Lifeco, that there would be no change to the operations or management of Putnam Investments, to Putnam Management’s management of the funds or to investment, advisory and other services provided to the funds by Putnam Management and its affiliates as a result of the Transfer.

• Putnam Management’s assurances that, following the Transfer, Putnam Management would continue to provide the same level of services to each fund and that the Transfer will not have an adverse impact on the ability of Putnam Management and its affiliates to continue to provide high quality investment advisory and other services to the funds.

• Putnam Management’s assurances that there are no current plans to make any changes to the operations of the funds, existing management fees, expense limitations, distribution arrangements, or the quality of any services provided to the funds or their shareholders, as a result of the Transfer.

• The benefits that the funds have received and may potentially receive as a result of Putnam Management being a member of the Power Corporation of Canada group of companies, which promotes the stability of the Putnam organization.

• Putnam Investments’ commitment to bear a reasonable share of the expenses incurred by the Putnam Funds in connection with the Transfer.

General conclusions in connection with the Trustees’ June 2013 approval of the fund’s management and sub-management contracts

As noted above, in connection with their deliberations in October and November 2013, in addition to the factors described above, the Trustees considered their recent approval of your fund’s management and sub-management contracts in June 2013. The Board oversees the management of each fund and, as required by law, determines annually whether to approve the continuance of your fund’s management and sub-management contracts. The Board, with the assistance of its Contract Committee, requests and evaluates all information it deems reasonably necessary under the circumstances in connection with its annual contract review. The Contract Committee consists solely of Independent Trustees.

At the outset of the review process, members of the Board’s independent staff and independent legal counsel met with representatives of Putnam Management to review the annual contract review materials furnished to the Contract Committee during the course of the previous year’s review and to discuss possible changes in these materials that might be necessary or desirable for the coming year. Following these discussions and in consultation with the Contract Committee, the Independent Trustees’ independent legal counsel requested that Putnam Management furnish specified information, together with any additional information that Putnam Management considered relevant, to the Contract Committee. Over the

course of several months ending in June 2013, the Contract Committee met on a number of occasions with representatives of Putnam Management, and separately in executive session, to consider the information that Putnam Management provided. Throughout this process, the Contract Committee was assisted by the members of the Board’s independent staff and by independent legal counsel for the Putnam funds and the Independent Trustees.

In May 2013, the Contract Committee met in executive session to discuss and consider its preliminary recommendations with respect to the continuance of the contracts. At the Trustees’ June 20, 2013 meeting, the Contract Committee met in executive session with the other Independent Trustees to review a summary of the key financial data that the Contract Committee considered in the course of its review. The Contract Committee then presented its written report, which summarized the key factors that the Committee had considered and set forth its final recommendations. The Contract Committee then recommended, and the Independent Trustees approved, the continuance of your fund’s management and sub-management contracts, effective July  1, 2013, subject to certain changes in the sub-management contract noted below. (Because PIL is an affiliate of Putnam Management and Putnam Management remains fully responsible for all services provided by PIL, the Trustees have not evaluated PIL as a separate entity, and all subsequent references to Putnam Management below should be deemed to include reference to PIL as necessary or appropriate in the context.)

The Independent Trustees’ June 2013 approval was based on the following conclusions:

• That the fee schedule in effect for your fund represented reasonable compensation in light of the nature and quality of the services being provided to the fund, the fees paid by competitive funds, and the costs incurred by Putnam Management in providing services to the fund, and

• That the fee schedule represented an appropriate sharing between fund shareholders and Putnam Management of such economies of scale as may exist in the management of the fund at current asset levels.

These conclusions were based on a comprehensive consideration of all information provided to the Trustees and were not the result of any single factor. Some of the factors that figured particularly in the Trustees’ deliberations and how the Trustees considered these factors are described below, although individual Trustees may have evaluated the information presented differently, giving different weights to various factors. It is also important to recognize that the management arrangements for your fund and the other Putnam funds are the result of many years of review and discussion between the Independent Trustees and Putnam Management, that some aspects of the arrangements may receive greater scrutiny in some years than others, and that the Trustees’ conclusions may be based, in part, on their consideration of fee arrangements in previous years.

As noted above, the Trustees considered administrative revisions to your fund’s sub-management contract. Putnam Management recommended that the sub-management contract be revised to reduce the sub-management fee that Putnam Management pays to PIL with respect to the portion of the portfolios of certain funds, but not your fund, that may be allocated to PIL from time to time. The Independent Trustees’ approval of this recommendation was based on their conclusion that these changes would have no practical effect on Putnam Management’s continued responsibility for the management of these funds or the costs borne by fund shareholders and would not result in any reduction in the nature and quality of services provided to the funds.

Management fee schedules and total expenses

The Trustees reviewed the management fee schedules in effect for all Putnam funds, including fee levels and breakpoints. The Trustees also reviewed the total expenses of each Putnam fund, recognizing that in most cases management fees represented the major, but not the sole, determinant of total costs to shareholders.

In reviewing fees and expenses, the Trustees generally focus their attention on material changes in circumstances — for example, changes in assets under management, changes in a fund’s investment style, changes in Putnam Management’s operating costs or profitability, or changes in competitive practices in the mutual fund industry — that suggest that consideration of fee changes might be warranted. The Trustees concluded that the circumstances did not warrant changes to the management fee structure of your fund.

Under its management contract, your fund has the benefit of breakpoints in its management fee schedule that provide shareholders with economies of scale in the form of reduced fee levels as the fund’s assets under management increase. In recent years, the Trustees have examined the operation of the existing breakpoint structure during periods of both growth and decline in asset levels. The Trustees concluded that the fee schedule in effect for your fund represented an appropriate sharing of economies of scale between fund shareholders and Putnam Management.

The Trustees reviewed comparative fee and expense information for a custom group of competitive funds selected by Lipper Inc. This comparative information included your fund’s percentile ranking for effective management fees and total expenses, which provides a general indication of your fund’s relative standing. In the custom peer group, your fund ranked in the first quintile in effective management fees (determined for your fund and the other funds in the custom peer group based on fund asset size and the applicable contractual management fee schedule) and in the second quintile in total expenses as of December 31, 2012 (the first quintile representing the least expensive funds and the fifth quintile the most expensive funds). The fee and expense data reported by Lipper as of December 31, 2012 reflected the most recent fiscal year-end data available in Lipper’s database at that time.

In connection with their review of the management fees and total expenses of the Putnam funds, the Trustees also reviewed the costs of the services provided and the profits realized by Putnam Management and its affiliates from their contractual relationships with the funds. This information included trends in revenues, expenses and profitability of Putnam Management and its affiliates relating to the investment management, investor servicing and distribution services provided to the funds. In this regard, the Trustees also reviewed an analysis of Putnam Management’s revenues, expenses and profitability, allocated on a fund-by-fund basis, with respect to the funds’ management, distribution, and investor servicing contracts. For each fund, the analysis presented information about revenues, expenses and profitability for each of the agreements separately and for the agreements taken together on a combined basis. The Trustees concluded that, at current asset levels, the fee schedules in place represented reasonable compensation for the services being provided and represented an appropriate sharing of such economies of scale as may exist in the management of the Putnam funds at that time.

The information examined by the Trustees as part of their annual contract review for the Putnam funds has included for many years information regarding fees charged by Putnam Management and its affiliates to institutional clients such as defined benefit pension plans, college endowments, and the like. This

information included comparisons of those fees with fees charged to the funds, as well as an assessment of the differences in the services provided to these different types of clients. The Trustees observed that the differences in fee rates between institutional clients and mutual funds are by no means uniform when examined by individual asset sectors, suggesting that differences in the pricing of investment management services to these types of clients may reflect historical competitive forces operating in separate markets. The Trustees considered the fact that in many cases fee rates across different asset classes are higher on average for mutual funds than for institutional clients, as well as the differences between the services that Putnam Management provides to the Putnam funds and those that it provides to its institutional clients. The Trustees did not rely on these comparisons to any significant extent in concluding that the management fees paid by your fund are reasonable.

Investment performance

The quality of the investment process provided by Putnam Management represented a major factor in the Trustees’ evaluation of the quality of services provided by Putnam Management under your fund’s management contract. The Trustees were assisted in their review of the Putnam funds’ investment process and performance by the work of the investment oversight committees of the Trustees, which meet on a regular basis with the funds’ portfolio teams and with the Chief Investment Officer and other senior members of Putnam Management’s Investment Division throughout the year. The Trustees concluded that Putnam Management generally provides a high-quality investment process — based on the experience and skills of the individuals assigned to the management of fund portfolios, the resources made available to them, and in general Putnam Management’s ability to attract and retain high-quality personnel — but also recognized that this does not guarantee favorable investment results for every fund in every time period.

The Trustees considered that 2012 was a year of strong competitive performance for many of the Putnam funds, with only a relatively small number of exceptions. They noted that this strong performance was exemplified by the fact that the Putnam funds were recognized by Barron’s as the best performing mutual fund complex for 2012 — the second time in four years that Putnam Management has achieved this distinction for the Putnam funds. They also noted, however, the disappointing investment performance of some funds for periods ended December 31, 2012 and considered information provided by Putnam Management regarding the factors contributing to the underperformance and actions being taken to improve the performance of these particular funds. The Trustees indicated their intention to continue to monitor performance trends to assess the effectiveness of these efforts and to evaluate whether additional actions to address areas of underperformance are warranted.

For purposes of evaluating investment performance, the Trustees generally focus on competitive industry rankings for the one-year, three-year, and five-year periods. For a number of Putnam funds with relatively unique investment mandates, the Trustees evaluated performance based on comparisons of their total returns with the returns of selected investment benchmarks or targeted returns. In the case of your fund, the Trustees considered that its common share cumulative total return performance at net asset value was in the following quartiles of its Lipper Inc. peer group (Lipper Flexible Income Funds (closed-end)) for the one-year, three-year and five-year periods ended December 31, 2012 (the first quartile representing the best-performing funds and the fourth quartile the worst-performing funds):

Over the one-year, three-year and five-year periods ended December 31, 2012, there were 5, 5 and 4 funds, respectively, in your fund’s Lipper peer group. (When considering performance information, shareholders should be mindful that past performance is not a guarantee of future results.)

The Trustees expressed concern about your fund’s fourth quartile performance over the three-year and five-year periods ended December 31, 2012 and considered the circumstances that may have contributed to this disappointing performance. The Trustees considered Putnam Management’s view that the fund’s underperformance over these periods was due in significant part to the fund’s underperformance in 2008 and 2011. The Trustees considered Putnam Management’s observation that the fund’s investments in commercial and residential mortgage-backed securities significantly underperformed during the economic downturn in 2008. The Trustees also considered Putnam Management’s view that, in 2011, the fund’s performance suffered for a variety of reasons, including its relative emphasis on shorter duration investments, which reduced the fund’s sensitivity to interest rate changes but detracted from performance, its exposure to high yield, non-Agency residential mortgage-backed securities, and its exposure to emerging markets coupled with currency exposure to the Australian dollar.

The Trustees considered that Putnam Management remained confident in the fund’s portfolio managers and their investment process. The Trustees also considered a number of other changes that Putnam Management had made in recent years in efforts to support and improve fund performance generally. In particular, the Trustees recognized that Putnam Management has adjusted the compensation structure for portfolio managers and research analysts so that only those who achieve top-quartile returns over a rolling three-year basis are eligible for full bonuses.

As a general matter, the Trustees believe that cooperative efforts between the Trustees and Putnam Management represent the most effective way to address investment performance problems. The Trustees noted that investors in the Putnam funds have, in effect, placed their trust in the Putnam organization, under the oversight of the funds’ Trustees, to make appropriate decisions regarding the management of the funds. Based on the responsiveness of Putnam Management in the recent past to performance issues, the Trustees concluded that it is preferable to seek change within Putnam Management to address performance shortcomings. In the Trustees’ view, the alternative of engaging a new investment adviser for an underperforming fund would entail significant disruptions and would not provide any greater assurance of improved investment performance.

Brokerage and soft-dollar allocations; investor servicing

The Trustees considered various potential benefits that Putnam Management may receive in connection with the services it provides under the management contract with your fund. These include benefits related to brokerage allocation and the use of soft dollars, whereby a portion of the commissions paid by a fund for brokerage may be used to acquire research services that are expected to be useful to Putnam Management in managing the assets of the fund and of other clients. Subject to policies established by the Trustees, soft dollars generated by these means are used primarily to acquire brokerage and research services that enhance Putnam Management’s investment capabilities and supplement Putnam Management’s internal research efforts. However, the Trustees noted that a portion of available

soft dollars continues to be used to pay fund expenses. The Trustees indicated their continued intent to monitor regulatory and industry developments in this area with the assistance of their Brokerage Committee and also indicated their continued intent to monitor the allocation of the Putnam funds’ brokerage in order to ensure that the principle of seeking best price and execution remains paramount in the portfolio trading process.

Putnam Management may also receivebenefits from payments that the funds make to Putnam Management’s affiliates for investor services. In conjunction with the annual review of your fund’s management and sub-management contracts, the Trustees reviewed your fund’s investor servicing agreement with Putnam Investor Services, Inc. (“PSERV”), which is an affiliate of Putnam Management. The Trustees concluded that the fees payable by the funds to PSERV for such services are reasonable in relation to the nature and quality of such services, the fees paid by competitive funds, and the costs incurred by PSERV in providing such services.

Financial statements

A guide to financial statements

These sections of the report, as well as the accompanying Notes, constitute the fund’s financial statements.

The fund’s portfolio lists all the fund’s investments and their values as of the last day of the reporting period. Holdings are organized by asset type and industry sector, country, or state to show areas of concentration and diversification.

Statement of assets and liabilities shows how the fund’s net assets and share price are determined. All investment and non-investment assets are added together. Any unpaid expenses and other liabilities are subtracted from this total. The result is divided by the number of shares to determine the net asset value per share. (For funds with preferred shares, the amount subtracted from total assets includes the liquidation preference of preferred shares.)

Statement of operations shows the fund’s net investment gain or loss. This is done by first adding up all the fund’s earnings — from dividends and interest income — and subtracting its operating expenses to determine net investment income (or loss). Then, any net gain or loss the fund realized on the sales of its holdings — as well as any unrealized gains or losses over the period — is added to or subtracted from the net investment result to determine the fund’s net gain or loss for the fiscal period.

Statement of changes in net assets shows how the fund’s net assets were affected by the fund’s net investment gain or loss, by distributions to shareholders, and by changes in the number of the fund’s shares. It lists distributions and their sources (net investment income or realized capital gains) over the current reporting period and the most recent fiscal year-end. The distributions listed here may not match the sources listed in the Statement of operations because the distributions are determined on a tax basis and may be paid in a different period from the one in which they were earned. Dividend sources are estimated at the time of declaration. Actual results may vary. Any non-taxable return of capital cannot be determined until final tax calculations are completed after the end of the fund’s fiscal year.

Financial highlights provide an overview of the fund’s investment results, per-share distributions, expense ratios, net investment income ratios, and portfolio turnover in one summary table, reflecting the five most recent reporting periods. In a semiannual report, the highlights table also includes the current reporting period.

The fund’s portfolio 3/31/14 (Unaudited)