Regulatory Update

As previously reported in the press, a number of private lawsuits have
also been filed including purported class action and derivative
lawsuits, against Deutsche Asset Management ("DeAM") and its
affiliates, including the investment advisor of your fund, and certain
Scudder funds and other related parties (the "Scudder defendants").
The following actions have been filed concerning illegal or improper
practices relating to market timing, revenue sharing or the pricing of
fund shares against DeAM and its affiliates, including the investment
advisor of your fund, and certain Scudder funds and other related
parties.

The following actions have been filed concerning alleged illegal or
improper practices relating to market timing, revenue sharing or the
pricing of fund shares.  Based on currently available information, DeAM
believes that the likelihood that the pending lawsuits will have a
material adverse financial impact on a Scudder fund is remote and are
not likely to materially affect its ability to perform under its
investment management agreements with the Scudder funds.

The following purported class action lawsuits have been filed:
The following purported class action lawsuits that have been filed
include: (1) On September 16, 2003, in the Circuit Court for Madison
County, Illinois entitled Potter v. Janus Investment Fund, et al.
Defendants include, among others, Deutsche Investment Management
Americas ("DIMA"), Inc. and Scudder International Fund.  (2) On January
22, 2004, in the United States District Court for the Southern District
of New York entitled Smith v. Scudder 21st Century Growth Fund, et al.
Defendants include, among others, Deutsche Bank AG ("DB AG"), Deutsche
Asset Management, Inc. ("DeAM"), DIMA, Inc., Scudder Investments, and
Scudder funds.  (3) On January 23, 2004, in the United States District
Court for the Southern District of New York entitled Malone v. Scudder
21st Century Growth Fund, et al.  Defendants include, among others, DB
AG, DeAM, Inc., DIMA, Inc., Scudder Investments, and Scudder Funds.
(4) On January 26, 2004, in the United States District Court for the
Southern District of New York entitled Driscoll v. DB AG, et al.
Defendants include, among others, DB AG, DeAM, Inc., DIMA, Inc.,
Scudder Investments, and Scudder funds.  (5) On January 29, 2004, in
the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York
entitled Atassi v. Scudder 21st Century Growth Fund, et al.  Defendants
include, among others, DB AG, DeAM, Inc., DIMA, Inc., Scudder
Investments, and Scudder funds.  (6) On February 10, 2004, in the
United States District Court for the Southern District of New York
entitled Walker v. Scudder 21st Century Growth Fund, et al.  Defendants
include, among others, DB AG, DeAM, Inc., DIMA, Inc., Scudder
Investments, and Scudder funds.  (7) On February 12, 2004, in the
United States District Court for the Southern District of New York
entitled McKenna v. Scudder 21st Century Growth Fund, et al.
Defendants include, among others, DB AG, DeAM, Inc., DIMA, Inc.,
Scudder Investments, and Scudder funds.  (8) On February 18, 2004, in
the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York
entitled Atassi v. Scudder 21st Century Growth Fund, et al.  Defendants
include, among others, DB AG, DeAM, Inc., DIMA, Inc., Scudder
Investments, and Scudder funds.  (9) On February 25, 2004, a lawsuit in
the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York
entitled Chin v. Scudder 21st Century Growth Fund, et al.  Defendants
include, among others, DB AG, DeAM, Inc., DIMA, Inc., Scudder
Investments, and Scudder funds.  (10) On February 25, 2004, in the
United States District Court for the Southern District of New York
entitled Doiron v. Scudder Advisor Funds, et al.  Defendants include,
among others, DB AG, DeAM, Inc., DIMA, Inc., Scudder Investments, and
Scudder funds.  (11) On March 17, 2004, in the United States District
Court for the Southern District of New York entitled Chorne v. Scudder
21st Century Growth Fund, et al.  Defendants include, among others, DB
AG, DeAM, Inc., DIMA, Inc., Scudder Investments, and Scudder funds.
(12) On March 18, 2004, in the United States District Court for the
Southern District of New York entitled Mocock v. Scudder 21st Century
Growth Fund, et al.  Defendants include, among others, DB AG, DeAM,
Inc., DIMA, Inc., Scudder Investments, and Scudder funds.

The following derivative lawsuits that have been filed: include:
(1) On February 2, 2004, in the United States District Court for the
Eastern District of New York entitled Hinton v. DB AG, et al.
Defendants include, among others, DB AG, DeAM, Inc., DIMA, Inc.,
Scudder Investments, certain Directors/Trustees of the Scudder funds,
and the CEO of DIMA, Inc. (2) On March 3, 2004, in the United States
District Court for the Eastern District of New York entitled Weiser v.
DB AG, et al.  Defendants include, among others, DB AG, DeAM, Inc.,
DIMA, Inc., Scudder Investments, certain Directors/Trustees of the
Scudder funds, and the CEO of DIMA, Inc.  (3) On March 5, 2004, in the
United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York
entitled Clark v. DB AG, et al.  Defendants include, among others, DB
AG, DeAM, Inc., DIMA, Inc., Scudder Investments, certain
Directors/Trustees of the Scudder funds, and the CEO of DIMA, Inc.

The following combined purported class action and derivative lawsuits
that have has been filed include: (1) On March 10, 2004, in the United
States District Court for the Southern District of New York entitled
Walker v. DB AG, et al.  Defendants include, among others, DB AG, DeAM,
Inc., DIMA, Inc., Scudder Investments, and certain Directors/Trustees
of the Scudder funds.

Based on currently available information, DeAM believes that the
likelihood that the pending lawsuits will have a material adverse
financial impact on a Scudder fund is remote and are not likely to
materially affect its ability to provide investment management services
to its clients, including the Scudder funds.