EX-99.77Q2 ITEM 405

DEUTSCHE BANK BROKER/DEALER AFFILIATES LIST
Name of Entity

Brokers to be included in Exhibit
Bank Inicjatyw Spoleczno-Ekonomicznych SA
BT Opera Trading S.A.
IBOXX Ltd.
K & N Kenanga Bhd
Kenanga Deutsche Futures
Kenanga Deutsche Futures Sdn Bhd
MaxBlue Investimentos Distribuidora de Titulos e Valores Mobili rios
S.A.
Minex Corporation
Morgan Grenfell & Co Limited
Morgan Grenfell Private Equity Limited
Morgan Grenfell Securities
Mortgage Ramp
MTS Japan Securities Co. Ltd.
Nissay Deutsche Asset Management Europe Limited
"Osaka Stock Exchange Co., Ltd."
OTC Deriv Limited
Paladin Australia Limited
Pro Capital Spolka Akcyjna
 PT Deutsche Securities Indonesia
"Rued, Blass & Cie AG Bankgeschaeft"
Swapswire Limited
Teleogic Limited
Tokai Deutsche Asset Management Limited
Volbroker.com Limited
Yensai.com
Yieldbroker Pty Ltd.

EX-99.77E LEGAL

Regulatory Update

As previously reported in the press, a number of private lawsuits
have been filed including purported class action and derivative
lawsuits, making various allegations and naming as defendants
various persons, including certain Scudder funds, the funds'
investment advisors and their affiliates, certain individuals,
including in some cases fund Trustees/Directors, officers, and
other parties.  Each Scudder fund's investment advisor has agreed
to indemnify the applicable Scudder funds in connection with these
lawsuits, or other lawsuits or regulatory actions that may be filed
making allegations similar to these lawsuits regarding market
timing, revenue sharing, fund valuation or other subjects arising
from or related to the pending inquiries.  Based on currently
available information, the funds' investment advisors believe the
likelihood that the pending lawsuits will have a material adverse
financial impact on a Scudder fund is remote and such actions are
not likely to materially affect their ability to perform under their
investment management agreements with the Scudder funds.

The following purported class action and derivative lawsuits
pertaining to market timing have been filed:

There are 15 class and derivative actions that have been
consolidated and transferred to a Multidistrict Litigation in the
District of Maryland ("MDL") (Multidistrict Litigation 1586-In re
Mutual Funds Investment Litigation).  The 11 Complaints
originally filed in the Southern District of New York that were
transferred to the MDL were virtually identical and each asserted
claims against Deutsche Bank AG, Deutsche Investment
Management Americas Inc. and Deutsche Asset Management, Inc.
as well as approximately 85 Funds in the Scudder family of funds
and John Doe defendants.  The three cases that were originally
filed in the Eastern District of New York and the one case
originally filed in the District of Delaware are derivative actions
brought by purported shareholders in many of the Scudder Funds.
These actions named Deutsche Investment Management Americas
Inc., Deutsche Asset Management, Inc., and John Doe defendants.
On September 29, 2004, two consolidated amended complaints one
a consolidated amended class action complaint and the other a
consolidated amended fund derivative complaint were filed.

On January 11, 2006 Plaintiffs filed a Second Consolidated Class
Action
Complaint. The officer defendants have been voluntarily dismissed
from the
class action pursuant to a tolling agreement entered into with
Plaintiffs.
Deutsche Bank AG has been dismissed for the derivative action.

State Case:
State Case:
On September 16, 2003, a case was commenced in the Circuit
Court for
Madison County, Illinois entitled Potter v. Janus Investment Fund,
et al.
Defendants include, among others, Deutsche Investment
Management Americas,
Inc. ("DIMA"), and Scudder International Fund.  On October 23,
2003,
Defendants removed the case to the United States District Court
for the
Northern District of Illinois. On February 9, 2004 the District
Court
remanded the case back to state court.  Defendants appealed this
decision.
On April 5, 2005 the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals reversed
the District
Court's decision and instructed the District Court to undo the
remand order
and dismiss the complaint.  On May 27, 2005, the District Court, in
accord
with the Appellate Court's mandate, dismissed the state law claims
with
prejudice.  On September 29, 2005, Plaintiffs filed a cert. petition
to the
Supreme Court.  On January 6, 2006, the Supreme Court granted
cert. to
address jurisdictional questions.  On June 15, 2006, the Supreme
Court
vacated the decision of the Seventh Circuit and held that the Court
of
Appeals did not have jurisdiction to address District Court's
remand order.

The following purported class action lawsuits pertaining to revenue
sharing have been filed:

There are 3 class actions that have been consolidated in the
Southern District of New York.  On September 6, 2005, Walker v.
Deutsche Bank AG, et al., Mazza v. Deutsche Bank AG, et al and
Icardo v. Deutsche Bank AG, et al, were consolidated.  The
consolidated Complaint filed on December 19, 2005 names
Deutsche Bank AG, certain affiliated adviser entities, and Scudder
Distributors Inc.

Motions to dismiss have been fully briefed.


In addition to the market timing, revenue sharing and valuation
litigation discussed above the following unrelated purported class
action lawsuit has been filed:

On January 12, 2005, in the United States District Court for the
Southern District of New York entitled McMunn and Raimo v.
Deutsche Bank Americas Holding Corporation, et al.  Defendants
include among others, Deutsche Bank Americas Holding
Corporation, DeAM, Inc., Scudder Investors Services, Inc., and
certain Directors/Trustees of the Scudder Funds.  The lawsuit
alleges the defendants breached their fiduciary duties and violated
the Investment Company Act of 1940 by failing to collect
settlement funds awarded in investor class action lawsuits for
securities held by the Scudder Funds.

Based on currently available information, the funds' investment
advisors believe the likelihood that this January 12, 2005 pending
lawsuit will have a material adverse financial impact on a Scudder
fund is remote and such action is not likely to materially affect
their ability to perform under their investment management
agreements with the Scudder funds.


G:\mfld\market timers\Disclosure - Litigation\77e disclosure _ 1-21-05.doc

EX-99.77C VOTES

Item 77C -
DWS S&P 500
Index Fund

Registrant
incorporates by
reference to its
Proxy Statement
filed on April 18,
2006
(Accession No.
0001193125-
06-082517).
A Special
Meeting of
Shareholders
(the "Meeting") of
DWS S&P 500
Index Fund (the
"Fund") was held
on May 5, 2006,
at the offices of
Deutsche Asset
Management,
Inc., 345 Park
Avenue, New
York, New York
10154. At the
Meeting, the
following matters
were voted upon
by the
shareholders (the
resulting votes
are presented
below).
I.	Election of
Trustees.
("Number of
Votes"
represents
all funds
that are
series of
DWS
Investment
Trust.)



Number of Votes:

For
Withheld
Henry P. Becton, Jr.
197,991,244.152
8,384,800.646
Dawn-Marie Driscoll
198,004,169.805
8,371,874.993
Keith R. Fox
197,921,453.939
8,454,590.859
Kenneth C. Froewiss
197,879,048.962
8,496,995.836
Martin J. Gruber
197,750,362.197
8,625,682.601
Richard J. Herring
197,887,720.225
8,488,324.573
Graham E. Jones
197,620,357.552
8,755,687.246
Rebecca W. Rimel
197,953,978.782
8,422,066.016
Philip Saunders, Jr.
197,686,623.053
8,689,421.745
William N. Searcy, Jr.
197,856,087.625
8,519,957.173
Jean Gleason
Stromberg
197,864,804.673
8,511,240.125
Carl W. Vogt
197,724,433.872
8,651,610.926
Axel Schwarzer
197,827,524.607
8,548,520.191

IV-A.	Approval of
an Amended
and
Restated
Declaration
of Trust.
(Number of
Votes"
represents
all funds
that are
series of
DWS
Investment
Trust.)

Number of Votes:
For
Against
Abstain
Broker Non-Votes*
182,220,628.110
7,305,857.658
8,890,637.030
7,958,922.000

The Meeting was
reconvened on
June 1, 2006, at
which time the
following matters
were voted upon
by the
shareholders (the
resulting votes
are presented
below).
II-A.	Approval of
an Amended
and
Restated
Investment
Managemen
t Agreement
between the
Fund and
DeIM.

Number of Votes:
For
Against
Abstain
Broker Non-Votes*
23,545,554.004
1,066,999.330
1,707,571.552
482,142.000

II-D.	Approval of
a
Subadvisor
Approval
Policy.

Number of Votes:
For
Against
Abstain
Broker Non-Votes*
23,273,543.168
1,275,262.429
1,771,319.289
482,142.000

III.	Approval of
Revised
Fundamenta
l Investment
Restrictions
on:
III-A.	Borrowing

Number of Votes:
For
Against
Abstain
Broker Non-Votes*
23,178,972.332
1,271,353.312
1,869,799.242
482,142.000

III-B.	Senior
Securities

Number of Votes:
For
Against
Abstain
Broker Non-Votes*
23,234,752.275
1,208,804.111
1,876,568.500
482,142.000

III-C.
	Concentra
tion

Number of Votes:
For
Against
Abstain
Broker Non-Votes*
23,224,651.975
1,216,063.080
1,879,409.831
482,142.000

III-D.	Underwriting

Number of Votes:
For
Against
Abstain
Broker Non-Votes*
23,242,228.130
1,200,382.494
1,877,514.262
482,142.000

III-E.	Real Estate

Number of Votes:
For
Against
Abstain
Broker Non-Votes*
23,235,350.021
1,209,647.460
1,875,127.405
482,142.000

III-F.
	Commoditi
es

Number of Votes:
For
Against
Abstain
Broker Non-Votes*
23,177,811.304
1,263,574.514
1,878,739.068
482,142.000

III-G.	Oil, Gas and
Mineral
Interests

Number of Votes:
For
Against
Abstain
Broker Non-Votes*
23,208,092.163
1,232,126.066
1,879,906.657
482,142.000



III-H.	Lending

Number of Votes:
For
Against
Abstain
Broker Non-Votes*
23,184,541.418
1,261,160.907
1,874,422.561
482,142.000

III-I.
	Diversifica
tion

Number of Votes:
For
Against
Abstain
Broker Non-Votes*
23,248,465.952
1,194,353.685
1,877,305.249
482,142.000






*	Broker non-votes
are proxies
received by the
fund from brokers
or nominees
when the broker
or nominee
neither has
received
instructions from
the beneficial
owner or other
persons entitled
to vote nor has
discretionary
power to vote on
a particular
matter.