HYT BlackRock Corporate High Yield Fund Inc

Item 7 - Disclosure of Proxy Voting Policies and Procedures for Closed-End
Management Investment Companies - The registrant has delegated the voting of proxies relating to Fund portfolio securities to its investment adviser, BlackRock Advisors, LLC and its sub-adviser, as applicable. The Proxy Voting Policies and Procedures of the adviser and sub-adviser are attached hereto as Exhibit 99.PROXYPOL.

Information about how a Fund voted proxies relating to securities held in the Fund's portfolio during the most recent 12 month period ended June 30 is available without charge (1) at www.blackrock.com and (2) on the Commission's web site at http://www.sec.gov.

Proxy Voting Policies and Procedures

For BlackRock Advisors, LLC

And Its Affiliated SEC Registered Investment Advisers

September 30, 2006

Table of Contents

Introduction.................................................................

Scope of Committee Responsibilities..........................................

Special Circumstances........................................................

Voting Guidelines............................................................

Boards of Directors....................................................

Auditors...............................................................

Compensation and Benefits..............................................

Capital Structure......................................................

Corporate Charter and By-Laws..........................................

Corporate Meetings.....................................................

Investment Companies...................................................

Environmental and Social Issues........................................

Notice to Clients............................................................

Proxy Voting Policies and Procedures

These Proxy Voting Policies and Procedures ("Policy") for BlackRock Advisors, LLC and its affiliated U.S. registered investment advisers(1) ("BlackRock") reflect our duty as a fiduciary under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 (the "Advisers Act") to vote proxies in the best interests of our clients. BlackRock serves as the investment manager for investment companies, other commingled investment vehicles and/or separate accounts of institutional and other clients. The right to vote proxies for securities held in such accounts belongs to BlackRock's clients. Certain clients of BlackRock have retained the right to vote such proxies in general or in specific circumstances.(2) Other clients, however, have delegated to BlackRock the right to vote proxies for securities held in their accounts as part of BlackRock's authority to manage, acquire and dispose of account assets.

When BlackRock votes proxies for a client that has delegated to BlackRock proxy voting authority, BlackRock acts as the client's agent. Under the Advisers Act, an investment adviser is a fiduciary that owes each of its clients a duty of care and loyalty with respect to all services the adviser undertakes on the client's behalf, including proxy voting. BlackRock is therefore subject to a fiduciary duty to vote proxies in a manner BlackRock believes is consistent with the client's best interests,(3) whether or not the client's proxy voting is subject to the fiduciary standards of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 ("ERISA").(4) When voting proxies for client accounts (including investment companies), BlackRock's primary objective is to make voting decisions solely in the best interests of clients and ERISA clients' plan beneficiaries and participants. In fulfilling its obligations to clients, BlackRock will seek to act in a manner that it believes is most likely to enhance the economic value of the underlying securities held in client accounts.(5) It is imperative that BlackRock considers the interests of its clients, and not the interests of BlackRock, when voting proxies and that real (or perceived) material conflicts that may arise between BlackRock's interest and those of BlackRock's clients are properly addressed and resolved.

(2) In certain situations, a client may direct BlackRock to vote in accordance with the client's proxy voting policies. In these situations, BlackRock will seek to comply with such policies to the extent it would not be inconsistent with other BlackRock legal responsibilities.

(3) Letter from Harvey L. Pitt, Chairman, SEC, to John P.M. Higgins, President, Ram Trust Services (February 12, 2002) (Section 206 of the Investment Advisers Act imposes a fiduciary responsibility to vote proxies fairly and in the best interests of clients); SEC Release No. IA-2106 (February 3, 2003).

(4) DOL Interpretative Bulletin of Sections 402, 403 and 404 of ERISA at 29 C.F.R. 2509.94-2.

(5) Other considerations, such as social, labor, environmental or other policies, may be of interest to particular clients. While BlackRock is cognizant of the importance of such considerations, when voting proxies it will generally take such matters into account only to the extent that they have a direct bearing on the economic value of the underlying securities. To the extent that a BlackRock client desires to pursue a particular social, labor, environmental or other agenda through the proxy votes made for its securities held through BlackRock as investment adviser, BlackRock encourages the client to consider retaining direct proxy voting authority or to appoint independently a special proxy voting fiduciary other than BlackRock.

Advisers Act Rule 206(4)-6 was adopted by the SEC in 2003 and requires, among other things, that an investment adviser that exercises voting authority over clients' proxy voting adopt policies and procedures reasonably designed to ensure that the adviser votes proxies in the best interests of clients, discloses to its clients information about those policies and procedures and also discloses to clients how they may obtain information on how the adviser has voted their proxies.

In light of such fiduciary duties, the requirements of Rule 206(4)-6, and given the complexity of the issues that may be raised in connection with proxy votes, BlackRock has adopted these policies and procedures. BlackRock's Equity Investment Policy Oversight Committee, or a sub-committee thereof (the "Committee"), addresses proxy voting issues on behalf of BlackRock and its clients.(6) The Committee is comprised of senior members of BlackRock's Portfolio Management Group and advised by BlackRock's Legal and Compliance Department.

I. Scope of Committee Responsibilities

The Committee shall have the responsibility for determining how to address proxy votes made on behalf of all BlackRock clients, except for clients who have retained the right to vote their own proxies, either generally or on any specific matter. In so doing, the Committee shall seek to ensure that proxy votes are made in the best interests of clients, and that proxy votes are determined in a manner free from unwarranted or inappropriate influences. The Committee shall also oversee the overall administration of proxy voting for BlackRock accounts.(7)

The Committee shall establish BlackRock's proxy voting guidelines, with such advice, participation and research as the Committee deems appropriate from portfolio managers, proxy voting services or other knowledgeable interested parties. As it is anticipated that there will not necessarily be a "right" way to vote proxies on any given issue applicable to all facts and circumstances, the Committee shall also be responsible for determining how the proxy voting guidelines will be applied to specific proxy votes, in light of each issuer's unique structure, management, strategic options and, in certain circumstances, probable economic and other anticipated consequences of alternative actions. In so doing, the Committee may determine to vote a particular proxy in a manner contrary to its generally stated guidelines.

The Committee may determine that the subject matter of certain proxy issues are not suitable for general voting guidelines and requires a case-by-case determination, in which case the Committee may elect not to adopt a specific voting guideline applicable to such issues. BlackRock believes that certain proxy voting issues - such as approval of mergers and other significant corporate transactions - require investment analysis akin to investment decisions, and are therefore not suitable for general guidelines. The Committee may elect to adopt a common BlackRock position on certain proxy votes that are akin to investment decisions, or determine to permit portfolio managers to make individual decisions on how best to maximize economic value for the accounts for which they are responsible (similar to normal buy/sell investment decisions made by such portfolio managers).(8)

While it is expected that BlackRock, as a fiduciary, will generally seek to vote proxies over which BlackRock exercises voting authority in a uniform manner for all BlackRock clients, the Committee, in conjunction with the portfolio manager of an account, may determine that the specific circumstances of such account require that such account's proxies be voted differently due to such account's investment objective or other factors that differentiate it from other accounts. In addition, on proxy votes that are akin to investment decisions, BlackRock believes portfolio managers may from time to time

(8) The Committee will normally defer to portfolio managers on proxy votes that are akin to investment decisions except for proxy votes that involve a material conflict of interest, in which case it will determine, in its discretion, the appropriate voting process so as to address such conflict.

legitimately reach differing but equally valid views, as fiduciaries for BlackRock's clients, on how best to maximize economic value in respect of a particular investment.

The Committee will also be responsible for ensuring the maintenance of records of each proxy vote, as required by Advisers Act Rule 204-2.(9) All records will be maintained in accordance with applicable law. Except as may be required by applicable legal requirements, or as otherwise set forth herein, the Committee's determinations and records shall be treated as proprietary, nonpublic and confidential.

The Committee shall be assisted by other BlackRock personnel, as may be appropriate. In particular, the Committee has delegated to the BlackRock Operations Department responsibility for monitoring corporate actions and ensuring that proxy votes are submitted in a timely fashion. The Operations Department shall ensure that proxy voting issues are promptly brought to the Committee's attention and that the Committee's proxy voting decisions are appropriately disseminated and implemented.

To assist BlackRock in voting proxies, the Committee may retain the services of a firm providing such services. BlackRock has currently retained Institutional Shareholder Services ("ISS") in that role. ISS is an independent adviser that specializes in providing a variety of fiduciary-level proxy-related services to institutional investment managers, plan sponsors, custodians, consultants, and other institutional investors. The services provided to BlackRock may include, but are not limited to, in-depth research, voting recommendations (which the Committee is not obligated to follow), vote execution, and recordkeeping.

II. Special Circumstances

Routine Consents. BlackRock may be asked from time to time to consent to an amendment to, or grant a waiver under, a loan agreement, partnership agreement, indenture or other governing document of a specific financial instrument held by BlackRock clients. BlackRock will generally treat such requests for consents not as "proxies" subject to these Proxy Voting Policies and Procedures but as investment matters to be dealt with by the responsible BlackRock investment professionals would, provided that such consents (i) do not relate to the election of a board of directors or appointment of auditors of a public company, and (ii) either (A) would not otherwise materially affect the structure, management or control of a public company, or (B) relate to a company in which BlackRock clients hold only interests in bank loans or debt securities and are consistent with customary standards and practices for such instruments.

Securities on Loan. Registered investment companies that are advised by BlackRock as well as certain of our advisory clients may participate in securities lending programs. Under most securities lending arrangements, securities on loan may not be voted by the lender (unless the loan is recalled). BlackRock believes that each client has the right to determine whether participating in a securities lending program enhances returns, to contract with the securities lending agent of its choice and to structure a securities lending program, through its lending agent, that balances any tension between loaning and voting securities in a matter that satisfies such client. If client has decided to participate in a securities lending program, BlackRock will therefore defer to the client's determination and not attempt to seek recalls solely for the purpose of voting routine proxies as this could impact the returns received from securities lending and make the client a less desirable lender in a marketplace. Where a client retains a lending agent that is unaffiliated with BlackRock, BlackRock will generally not seek to vote proxies relating to securities on loan because BlackRock does not have a contractual right to recall such loaned securities for the purpose of voting proxies. Where BlackRock or an affiliate acts as the lending agent, BlackRock will also generally not seek to recall loaned securities for proxy voting purposes, unless the portfolio manager responsible for the account or the Committee determines that voting the proxy is in the client's best interest and requests that the security be recalled.

Voting Proxies for Non-US Companies. While the proxy voting process is well established in the United States, voting proxies of non-US companies frequently involves logistical issues which can affect BlackRock's ability to vote such proxies, as well as the desirability of voting such proxies. These issues include (but are not limited to): (i) untimely notice of shareholder meetings, (ii) restrictions on a foreigner's ability to exercise votes, (iii) requirements to vote proxies in person, (iv) "shareblocking" (requirements that investors who exercise their voting rights surrender the right to dispose of their holdings for some specified period in proximity to the shareholder meeting), (v) potential difficulties in translating the proxy, and (vi) requirements to provide local agents with unrestricted powers of attorney to facilitate voting instructions.

As a consequence, BlackRock votes proxies of non-US companies only on a "best-efforts" basis. In addition, the Committee may determine that it is generally in the best interests of BlackRock clients not to vote proxies of companies in certain countries if the Committee determines that the costs (including but not limited to opportunity costs associated with shareblocking constraints) associated with exercising a vote generally are expected to outweigh the benefit the client will derive by voting on the issuer's proposal. If the Committee so determines in the case of a particular country, the Committee (upon advice from BlackRock portfolio managers) may override such determination with respect to a particular issuer's shareholder meeting if the Committee believes the benefits of seeking to exercise a vote at such meeting outweighs the costs, in which case BlackRock will seek to vote on a best-efforts basis.

Securities Sold After Record Date. With respect to votes in connection with securities held on a particular record date but sold from a client account prior to the holding of the related meeting, BlackRock may take no action on proposals to be voted on in such meeting.

Conflicts of Interest. From time to time, BlackRock may be required to vote proxies in respect of an issuer that is an affiliate of BlackRock (a "BlackRock Affiliate"), or a money management or other client of BlackRock (a "BlackRock Client").(10) In such event, provided that the Committee is aware of the real or potential conflict, the following procedures apply:

o The Committee intends to adhere to the voting guidelines set forth herein for all proxy issues including matters involving BlackRock Affiliates and BlackRock Clients. The Committee may, in its discretion for the purposes of ensuring that an independent determination is reached, retain an independent fiduciary to advise the Committee on how to vote or to cast votes on behalf of BlackRock's clients; and

o if the Committee determines not to retain an independent fiduciary, or does not desire to follow the advice of such independent fiduciary, the Committee shall determine how to vote the proxy after consulting with the BlackRock Legal and Compliance Department and concluding that the vote cast is in the client's best interest notwithstanding the conflict.

III. Voting Guidelines

The Committee has determined that it is appropriate and in the best interests of BlackRock's clients to adopt the following voting guidelines, which represent the Committee's usual voting position on certain recurring proxy issues that are not expected to involve unusual circumstances. With respect to any particular proxy issue, however, the Committee may elect to vote differently than a voting guideline if the Committee determines that doing so is, in the Committee's judgment, in the best interest of its clients. The guidelines may be reviewed at any time upon the request of any Committee member and may be amended or deleted upon the vote of a majority of voting Committee members present at a Committee meeting for which there is a quorum.

A. Boards of Directors

These proposals concern those issues submitted to shareholders relating to the composition of the Board of Directors of companies other than investment companies. As a general matter, the Committee believes that a company's Board of Directors (rather than shareholders) is most likely to have access to important, nonpublic information regarding a company's business and prospects, and is therefore best-positioned to set corporate policy and oversee management. The Committee therefore believes that the foundation of good corporate governance is the election of qualified, independent corporate directors who are likely to diligently represent the interests of shareholders and oversee management of the corporation in a manner that will seek to maximize shareholder value over time. In individual cases, the Committee may look at a Director nominee's history of representing shareholder interests as a director of other companies, or other factors to the extent the Committee deems relevant.

The Committee's general policy is to vote:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
# VOTE and DESCRIPTION
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A.1 FOR nominees for director of United States companies in uncontested
 elections, except for nominees who
 o have missed at least two meetings and, as a result, attended less
 than 75% of meetings of the Board of Directors and its committees
 the previous year, unless the nominee missed the meeting(s) due to
 illness or company business
 o voted to implement or renew a "dead-hand" poison pill
 o ignored a shareholder proposal that was approved by either a
 majority of the shares outstanding in any year or by the majority of
 votes cast for two consecutive years
 o failed to act on takeover offers where the majority of the
 shareholders have tendered their shares
 o are corporate insiders who serve on the audit, compensation or
 nominating committees or on a full Board that does not have such
 committees composed exclusively of independent directors
 o on a case-by-case basis, have served as directors of other companies
 with allegedly poor corporate governance
 o sit on more than six boards of public companies
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A.2 FOR nominees for directors of non-U.S. companies in uncontested elections,
 except for nominees from whom the Committee determines to withhold votes
 due to the nominees' poor records of representing shareholder interests,
 on a case-by-case basis
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A.3 FOR proposals to declassify Boards of Directors, except where there exists
 a legitimate purpose for classifying boards
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A.4 AGAINST proposals to classify Boards of Directors, except where there
 exists a legitimate purpose for classifying boards
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A.5 AGAINST proposals supporting cumulative voting
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A.6 FOR proposals eliminating cumulative voting
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A.7 FOR proposals supporting confidential voting
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A.8 FOR proposals seeking election of supervisory board members
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A.9 AGAINST shareholder proposals seeking additional representation of women
 and/or minorities generally (i.e., not specific individuals) to a Board of
 Directors
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A.10 AGAINST shareholder proposals for term limits for directors
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A.11 FOR shareholder proposals to establish a mandatory retirement age for
 directors who attain the age of 72 or older
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A.12 AGAINST shareholder proposals requiring directors to own a minimum amount
 of company stock
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A.13 FOR proposals requiring a majority of independent directors on a Board of
 Directors
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A.14 FOR proposals to allow a Board of Directors to delegate powers to a
 committee or committees
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A.15 FOR proposals to require audit, compensation and/or nominating committees
 of a Board of Directors to consist exclusively of independent directors
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A.16 AGAINST shareholder proposals seeking to prohibit a single person from
 occupying the roles of chairman and chief executive officer
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A.17 FOR proposals to elect account inspectors
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A.18 FOR proposals to fix the membership of a Board of Directors at a specified
 size
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A.19 FOR proposals permitting shareholder ability to nominate directors
 directly
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A.20 AGAINST proposals to eliminate shareholder ability to nominate directors
 directly
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A.21 FOR proposals permitting shareholder ability to remove directors directly
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A.22 AGAINST proposals to eliminate shareholder ability to remove directors
 directly
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Auditors

These proposals concern those issues submitted to shareholders related to the selection of auditors. As a general matter, the Committee believes that corporate auditors have a responsibility to represent the interests of shareholders and provide an independent view on the propriety of financial reporting decisions of corporate management. While the Committee will generally defer to a corporation's choice of auditor, in individual cases, the Committee may look at an auditors' history of representing shareholder interests as auditor of other companies, to the extent the Committee deems relevant.

The Committee's general policy is to vote:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
B.1 FOR approval of independent auditors, except for
 o auditors that have a financial interest in, or material association
 with, the company they are auditing, and are therefore believed by
 the Committee not to be independent
 o auditors who have rendered an opinion to any company which in the
 Committee's opinion is either not consistent with best accounting
 practices or not indicative of the company's financial situation
 o on a case-by-case basis, auditors who in the Committee's opinion
 provide a significant amount of non-audit services to the company
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
B.2 FOR proposals seeking authorization to fix the remuneration of auditors
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
B.3 FOR approving internal statutory auditors
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
B.4 FOR proposals for audit firm rotation, except for proposals that would
 require rotation after a period of less than 5 years
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. Compensation and Benefits

These proposals concern those issues submitted to shareholders related to management compensation and employee benefits. As a general matter, the Committee favors disclosure of a company's compensation and benefit policies and opposes excessive compensation, but believes that compensation matters are normally best determined by a corporation's board of directors, rather than shareholders. Proposals to "micro-manage" a company's compensation practices or to set arbitrary restrictions on compensation or benefits will therefore generally not be supported.

The Committee's general policy is to vote:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
C.1 IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE RECOMMENDATION OF ISS on compensation plans if the
 ISS recommendation is based solely on whether or not the company's plan
 satisfies the allowable cap as calculated by ISS. If the recommendation of
 ISS is based on factors other than whether the plan satisfies the
 allowable cap the Committee will analyze the particular proposed plan.
 This policy applies to amendments of plans as well as to initial
 approvals.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
C.2 FOR proposals to eliminate retirement benefits for outside directors
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
C.3 AGAINST proposals to establish retirement benefits for outside directors
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
C.4 FOR proposals approving the remuneration of directors or of supervisory
 board members
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
C.5 AGAINST proposals to reprice stock options
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
C.6 FOR proposals to approve employee stock purchase plans that apply to all
 employees. This policy applies to proposals to amend ESPPs if the plan as
 amended applies to all employees.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
C.7 FOR proposals to pay retirement bonuses to directors of Japanese companies
 unless the directors have served less than three years
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
C.8 AGAINST proposals seeking to pay outside directors only in stock
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
C.9 FOR proposals seeking further disclosure of executive pay or requiring
 companies to report on their supplemental executive retirement benefits
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
C.10 AGAINST proposals to ban all future stock or stock option grants to
 executives
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
C.11 AGAINST option plans or grants that apply to directors or employees of
 "related companies" without adequate disclosure of the corporate
 relationship and justification of the option policy
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
C.12 FOR proposals to exclude pension plan income in the calculation of
 earnings used in determining executive bonuses/compensation
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
D.1 AGAINST proposals seeking authorization to issue shares without preemptive
 rights except for issuances up to 10% of a non-US company's total
 outstanding capital
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
D.2 FOR management proposals seeking preemptive rights or seeking
 authorization to issue shares with preemptive rights
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
D.3 FOR management proposals approving share repurchase programs
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
D.4 FOR management proposals to split a company's stock
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
D.5 FOR management proposals to denominate or authorize denomination of
 securities or other obligations or assets in Euros
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
D.6 FOR proposals requiring a company to expense stock options (unless the
 company has already publicly committed to do so by a certain date).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
E.1 AGAINST proposals seeking to adopt a poison pill
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
E.2 FOR proposals seeking to redeem a poison pill
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
E.3 FOR proposals seeking to have poison pills submitted to shareholders for
 ratification
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
E.4 FOR management proposals to change the company's name
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
F.1 AGAINST proposals that seek authority to act on "any other business that
 may arise"
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
F.2 FOR proposals designating two shareholders to keep minutes of the meeting
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
F.3 FOR proposals concerning accepting or approving financial statements and
 statutory reports
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
F.4 FOR proposals approving the discharge of management and the supervisory
 board
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
F.5 FOR proposals approving the allocation of income and the dividend
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
F.6 FOR proposals seeking authorization to file required documents/other
 formalities
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
F.7 FOR proposals to authorize the corporate board to ratify and execute
 approved resolutions
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
F.8 FOR proposals appointing inspectors of elections
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
F.9 FOR proposals electing a chair of the meeting
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
F.10 FOR proposals to permit "virtual" shareholder meetings over the Internet
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
F.11 AGAINST proposals to require rotating sites for shareholder meetings
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

G. Investment Companies

These proposals relate to proxy issues that are associated solely with holdings of shares of investment companies, including, but not limited to, investment companies for which BlackRock provides investment advisory, administrative and/or other services. As with other types of companies, the Committee believes that a fund's Board of Directors (rather than its shareholders) is best-positioned to set fund policy and oversee management. However, the Committee opposes granting Boards of Directors authority over certain matters, such as changes to a fund's investment objective, that the Investment Company Act of 1940 envisions will be approved directly by shareholders.

The Committee's general policy is to vote:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
G.1 FOR nominees for director of mutual funds in uncontested elections, except
 for nominees who
 o have missed at least two meetings and, as a result, attended less
 than 75% of meetings of the Board of Directors and its committees
 the previous year, unless the nominee missed the meeting due to
 illness or fund business
 o ignore a shareholder proposal that was approved by either a majority
 of the shares outstanding in any year or by the majority of votes
 cast for two consecutive years
 o are interested directors who serve on the audit or nominating
 committees or on a full Board that does not have such committees
 composed exclusively of independent directors
 o on a case-by-case basis, have served as directors of companies with
 allegedly poor corporate governance
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
G.2 FOR the establishment of new series or classes of shares
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
G.3 AGAINST proposals to change a fund's investment objective to
 nonfundamental
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
G.4 FOR proposals to establish a master-feeder structure or authorizing the
 Board to approve a master-feeder structure without a further shareholder
 vote
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
G.5 AGAINST a shareholder proposal for the establishment of a director
 ownership requirement
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
G.6 FOR classified boards of closed-end investment companies
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

H. Environmental and Social Issues

These are shareholder proposals to limit corporate conduct in some manner that relates to the shareholder's environmental or social concerns. The Committee generally believes that annual shareholder meetings are inappropriate forums for the discussion of larger social issues, and opposes shareholder resolutions "micromanaging" corporate conduct or requesting release of information that would not help a shareholder evaluate an investment in the corporation as an economic matter. While the Committee is generally supportive of proposals to require corporate disclosure of matters that seem relevant and material to the economic interests of shareholders, the Committee is generally not supportive of proposals to require disclosure of corporate matters for other purposes.

The Committee's general policy is to vote:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
H.1 AGAINST proposals seeking to have companies adopt international codes of
 conduct
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
H.2 AGAINST proposals seeking to have companies provide non-required reports
 on:
 o environmental liabilities;
 o bank lending policies;
 o corporate political contributions or activities;
 o alcohol advertising and efforts to discourage drinking by minors;
 o costs and risk of doing business in any individual country;
 o involvement in nuclear defense systems
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
H.3 AGAINST proposals requesting reports on Maquiladora operations or on CERES
 principles
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
H.4 AGAINST proposals seeking implementation of the CERES principles
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Notice to Clients

BlackRock will make records of any proxy vote it has made on behalf of a client available to such client upon request.(11) BlackRock will use its best efforts to treat proxy votes of clients as confidential, except as it may decide to best serve its clients' interests or as may be necessary to effect such votes or as may be required by law.

BlackRock encourage clients with an interest in particular proxy voting issues to make their views known to BlackRock, provided that, in the absence of specific written direction from a client on how to vote that client's proxies, BlackRock reserves the right to vote any proxy in a manner it deems in the best interests of its clients, as it determines in its sole discretion.

These policies are as of the date indicated on the cover hereof. The Committee may subsequently amend these policies at any time, without notice.

Item 8 - Portfolio Managers of Closed-End Management Investment Companies - as of August 31, 2007.

(a)(1) BlackRock Corporate High Yield Fund VI, Inc. is managed by a team of investment professionals comprised of Scott Amero, Managing Director at BlackRock, Jeffrey Gary, CPA, Managing Director at BlackRock, Kevin J. Booth, CFA, Managing Director at BlackRock and James E. Keenan, CFA, Director at BlackRock. Each is a member of BlackRock's fixed income portfolio management group. Messrs. Amero and Gary are responsible for setting the Fund's overall credit strategy. Messrs. Booth and Keenan are the Fund's co-portfolio managers and are responsible for the day-to-day management of the Fund's portfolio and the selection of its investments. Messrs. Amero and Gary have been members of the Fund's management team since 2006 and Mr. Keenan has been the Fund's portfolio manager since 2006 and Mr. Booth has been the Fund's portfolio manager since 2007.

Scott Amero is co-head of BlackRock's fixed income portfolio management group. He is a member of the Management Committee and the Investment Strategy Group. Mr. Amero is a senior strategist and portfolio manager with responsibility for overseeing all fixed income sector strategy and the overall management of client portfolios. He is also the head of global credit research. He is a director of Anthracite Capital, Inc., BlackRock's publicly-traded real estate investment trust. Mr. Amero has been with BlackRock since 1990.

Jeffrey Gary is the head of BlackRock's high yield team within the Fixed Income Portfolio Management Group. Prior to joining BlackRock in 2003, Mr. Gary was a Managing Director and portfolio manager with AIG (American General) Investment Group.

Kevin Booth is co-head of the high yield team within BlackRock's Fixed Income Portfolio Management Group. His primary responsibilities are managing portfolios and directing investment strategy. He specializes in hybrid high yield portfolios, consisting of leveraged bank loans, high yield bonds, and distressed obligations. Prior to joining BlackRock, Mr. Booth was a Managing Director (Global Fixed Income) of Merrill Lynch Investment Managers ("MLIM") in 2006, a Director from 1998 to 2006 and was a Vice President of MLIM from 1991 to 1998. He has been a portfolio manager with BlackRock or MLIM since 1992, and was a member of MLIM's bank loan group from 2000 to 2006.

James Keenan is a high yield portfolio manager and trader within BlackRock's Fixed Income Portfolio Management Group. His primary responsibilities are managing client portfolios, executing trades and ensuring consistency across high yield portfolios. Mr. Keenan has been with BlackRock since 2004. Prior to joining BlackRock, he was a senior high yield trader at Columbia Management Group. Mr. Keenan began his investment career at UBS Global Asset Management where he held roles as a trader, research analyst and a portfolio analyst from 1998 through 2003.

(a)(2) As of August 31, 2007: [to be updated before filing]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 (iii) Number of Other Accounts and
 (ii) Number of Other Accounts Managed Assets for Which Advisory Fee is
 and Assets by Account Type Performance-Based
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Other Other
 (i) Name of Registered Other Pooled Registered Other Pooled
 Portfolio Investment Investment Other Investment Investment Other
 Manager Companies Vehicles Accounts Companies Vehicles Accounts
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Scott Amero 48 43 260 0 6 22
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 $38,338,511,586 $10,705,355,517 $91,635,073,306 $0 $2,380,367,169 $6,516,538,728
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jeffrey Gary 17 13 15 0 5 5
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 $ 7,935,732,170 $ 7,296,812,550 $ 3,035,996,960 $0 $1,947,853,068 $ 865,727,083
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kevin Booth 22 9 7 0 4 3
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 $10,849,278,610 $ 3,305,024,401 $ 1,224,383,989 $0 $1,483,112,004 $ 539,887,685
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
James Keenan 17 8 16 0 2 5
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 $ 7,935,732,170 $ 2,072,998,559 $ 2,827,296,066 $0 $ 997,548,495 $ 727,207,901
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

(iv) Potential Material Conflicts of Interest

BlackRock has built a professional working environment, firm-wide compliance culture and compliance procedures and systems designed to protect against potential incentives that may favor one account over another. BlackRock has adopted policies and procedures that address the allocation of investment opportunities, execution of portfolio transactions, personal trading by employees and other potential conflicts of interest that are designed to ensure that all client accounts are treated equitably over time. Nevertheless, BlackRock furnishes investment management and advisory services to numerous clients in addition to the Fund, and BlackRock may, consistent with applicable law, make investment recommendations to other clients or accounts (including accounts which are hedge funds or have performance or higher fees paid to BlackRock, or in which portfolio managers have a personal interest in the receipt of such fees), which may be the same as or different from those made to the Fund. In addition, BlackRock, its affiliates and any officer, director, stockholder or employee may or may not have an interest in the securities whose purchase and sale BlackRock recommends to the Fund. BlackRock, or any of its affiliates, or any officer, director, stockholder, employee or any member of their families may take different actions than those recommended to the Fund by BlackRock with respect to the same securities. Moreover, BlackRock may refrain from rendering any advice or services concerning securities of companies of which any of BlackRock's (or its affiliates') officers, directors or employees are directors or officers, or companies as to which BlackRock or any of its affiliates or the officers, directors and employees of any of them has any substantial economic interest or possesses material non-public information. Each portfolio manager also may manage accounts whose investment strategies may at times be opposed to the strategy utilized for the Fund. In this connection, it should be noted that certain portfolio managers currently manage certain accounts that are subject to performance fees. In addition, certain portfolio managers assist in managing certain hedge funds and may be entitled to receive a portion of any incentive fees earned on such funds and a portion of such incentive fees may be voluntarily or involuntarily deferred. Additional portfolio managers may in the future manage other such accounts or funds and may be entitled to receive incentive fees.

As a fiduciary, BlackRock owes a duty of loyalty to its clients and must treat each client fairly. When BlackRock purchases or sells securities for more than one account, the trades must be allocated in a manner consistent with its fiduciary duties. BlackRock attempts to allocate investments in a fair and equitable manner among client accounts, with no account receiving preferential treatment. To this end, BlackRock has adopted a policy that is intended to ensure that investment opportunities are allocated fairly and equitably among client accounts over time. This policy also seeks to achieve reasonable efficiency in client transactions and provide BlackRock with sufficient flexibility to allocate investments in a manner that is consistent with the particular investment discipline and client base.

(a)(3) As of August 31, 2007:

Portfolio Manager Compensation

BlackRock's financial arrangements with its portfolio managers, its competitive compensation and its career path emphasis at all levels reflect the value senior management places on key resources. Compensation may include a variety of components and may vary from year to year based on a number of factors. The principal components of compensation include a base salary, a discretionary bonus, participation in various benefits programs and one or more of the incentive compensation programs established by BlackRock such as its Long-Term Retention and Incentive Plan and Restricted Stock Program.

Base compensation

Generally, portfolio managers receive base compensation based on their seniority and/or their position with the firm.

Discretionary compensation

In addition to base compensation, portfolio managers may receive discretionary compensation, which can be a substantial portion of total compensation. Discretionary compensation can include a discretionary cash bonus as well as one or more of the following:

Long-Term Retention and Incentive Plan (LTIP)

The LTIP is a long-term incentive plan that seeks to reward certain key employees. The plan provides for the grant of awards that are expressed as an amount of cash that, if properly vested and subject to the attainment of certain performance goals, will be settled in cash and/or in BlackRock, Inc. common stock.

Deferred Compensation Program

A portion of the compensation paid to each portfolio manager may be voluntarily deferred by the portfolio manager into an account that tracks the performance of certain of the firm's investment products. Each portfolio manager is permitted to allocate his deferred amounts among various options, including to certain of the firm's hedge funds and other unregistered products. In addition, prior to 2005, a portion of the annual compensation of certain senior managers was mandatorily deferred in a similar manner for a number of years. Beginning in 2005, a portion of the annual compensation of certain senior managers was paid in the form of BlackRock, Inc. restricted stock units which vest ratably over a number of years.

Options and Restricted Stock Awards

While incentive stock options are not currently being awarded to BlackRock employees, BlackRock, Inc. previously granted stock options to key employees, including certain portfolio managers who may still hold unexercised or unvested options. BlackRock, Inc. also has a restricted stock award program designed to reward certain key employees as an incentive to contribute to the long-term success of BlackRock. These awards vest over a period of years.

Incentive Savings Plans

BlackRock, Inc. has created a variety of incentive savings plans in which BlackRock employees are eligible to participate, including an Employee Stock Purchase Plan (ESPP) and a 401(k) plan. The 401(k) plan may involve a company match of 50% of the employee's pre-tax contribution of up to 6% of the employee's salary, limited to $4,000 per year. BlackRock also offers a Company Retirement Contribution equal to 3% to 5% of eligible compensation, depending on BlackRock, Inc.'s overall net operating income. The company match is made in cash. The firm's 401(k) plan offers a range of investment options, including registered investment companies managed by the firm. Each portfolio manager is eligible to participate in these plans.

 Annual incentive compensation for each portfolio manager is a
 function of several components: the performance of BlackRock, Inc.,
 the performance of the portfolio manager's group within BlackRock,
 the investment performance, including risk-adjusted returns and
 income generation, of the firm's assets under management or
 supervision by that portfolio manager relative to predetermined
 benchmarks, and the individual's teamwork and contribution to the
 overall performance of these portfolios and BlackRock. Unlike many
 other firms, portfolio managers at BlackRock compete against
 benchmarks rather than each other. In most cases, including for the
 portfolio managers of the Registrant, these benchmarks are the same
 as the benchmark or benchmarks against which the investment
 performance, including risk-adjusted returns and income generation,
 of the Registrant or other accounts are measured. These benchmarks
 include customized benchmarks, Lipper peer groups and a subset of
 other closed-end taxable debt funds. A group of BlackRock, Inc.'s
 officers determines which benchmarks against which to compare the
 performance of funds and other accounts managed by each portfolio
 manager. With respect to the Registrant, such benchmarks include the
 Credit Suisse High Yield Index.

 The group of BlackRock, Inc.'s officers then makes a subjective
 determination with respect to the portfolio manager's compensation
 based on the performance of the funds and other accounts managed by
 each portfolio manager relative to the various benchmarks. This
 determination may take into consideration the fact that a benchmark
 may not perfectly correlate to the way the Registrant or other
 accounts are managed, even if it is the benchmark that is most
 appropriate for the Registrant or other account. For example, a
 benchmark's return may be based on the total return of the
 securities comprising the benchmark, but the Registrant or other
 account may be managed to maximize income and not total return.
 Senior portfolio managers who perform additional management
 functions within BlackRock may receive additional compensation for
 serving in these other capacities.

 (a)(4) Beneficial Ownership of Securities. As of August 31, 2007,
 none of Messrs. Amero, Gary, Keenan or Booth beneficially own any
 stock issued by the Fund.

Item 9 - Purchases of Equity Securities by Closed-End Management Investment
 Company and Affiliated Purchasers - Not Applicable due to no such
 purchases during the period covered by this report.

Item 10 - Submission of Matters to a Vote of Security Holders - The
 registrant's Nominating Committee will consider nominees to the
 Board recommended by shareholders when a vacancy becomes available.
 Shareholders who wish to recommend a nominee should send nominations
 which include biographical information and set forth the
 qualifications of the proposed nominee to the registrant's
 Secretary. There have been no material changes to these procedures.

Item 11 - Controls and Procedures

11(a) - The registrant's principal executive and principal financial
 officers or persons performing similar functions have concluded that
 the registrant's disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in
 Rule 30a-3(c) under the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended
 (the "1940 Act")) are effective as of a date within 90 days of the
 filing of this report based on the evaluation of these controls and
 procedures required by Rule 30a-3(b) under the 1940 Act and Rule
 13a-15(b) under the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.

11(b) - There were no changes in the registrant's internal control over
 financial reporting (as defined in Rule 30a-3(d) under the 1940 Act)
 that occurred during the second fiscal quarter of the period covered
 by this report that have materially affected, or are reasonably
 likely to materially affect, the registrant's internal control over
 financial reporting.

Item 12 - Exhibits attached hereto

12(a)(1) - Code of Ethics - See Item 2

12(a)(2) - Certifications - Attached hereto

12(a)(3) - Not Applicable

12(b) - Certifications - Attached hereto

Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the Investment Company Act of 1940, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.

BlackRock Corporate High Yield Fund VI, Inc.

By: /s/ Robert C. Doll, Jr.
 -------------------------------
 Robert C. Doll, Jr.,
 Chief Executive Officer (principal executive officer) of
 BlackRock Corporate High Yield Fund VI, Inc.

Date: October 22, 2007

Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the Investment Company Act of 1940, this report has been signed below by the following persons on behalf of the registrant and in the capacities and on the dates indicated.

By: /s/ Robert C. Doll, Jr.
 -------------------------------
 Robert C. Doll, Jr.,
 Chief Executive Officer (principal executive officer) of
 BlackRock Corporate High Yield Fund VI, Inc.

Date: October 22, 2007


By: /s/ Donald C. Burke
 -------------------------------
 Donald C. Burke,
 Chief Financial Officer (principal financial officer) of
 BlackRock Corporate High Yield Fund VI, Inc.

Date: October 22, 2007