Obviously, this product is designed for someone like me who is just
interested in growing assets tax deferred and not interested in any
insurance features.

To the OP,

Are you maximizing 401k contribs, Roths, and IRAs if they are
available to you. Deferred annuities are one of the last stops (if not
the last) on the tax deferral train. How old are you?

Don't worry about the financial stability of the company until you are
sure its the right investment vehicle to begin with.

Most importantly, did you FULLY read the fine print on the Jefferson
National products? From the "monument advisor" page of their website:

* Jefferson National's Monument Advisor has a $20 flat insurance fee
on more than 97% of our underlying funds. Certain funds also have a
transaction fee ranging from $19.99 to $49.99 per transaction,
depending on the number of transactions per year. See the prospects
for details. Like other variable annuities, the customer pays fees of
the underlying funds selected (currently ranging from 0.23% - 2.72%;
except for Rydex VT Inverse Gov't Long Bond Fund which is currently
5.12%) plus the fees of any advisor hired. The range of underlying
fund fees reflect the minimum and maximum charges after contractual
waivers that have been committed to through at least May 1, 2008.

Are you maximizing 401k contribs, Roths, and IRAs if they are
available to you. Deferred annuities are one of the last stops (if not
the last) on the tax deferral train. How old are you?

Yes I have maximized all other vehicles available to me. This money

pal123 wrote:

Obviously, this product is designed for someone like me who is just
interested in growing assets tax deferred and not interested in any
insurance features.

I have to ask one question of you - by deferring the taxes, you turn
dividend and long term cap gain treatment into ordinary income. And run
the risk of this income putting you into the bizarre social security tax
bubble where an individual can pay a phantom 46.25% on net taxable
income of just $32K or so. I know that with such a low annual fee,
Jefferson National has no salesman about to put his kids through college
at your expense, that's a good thing, but I wonder what you feel the
benefit is. I've written some negative things about VAs, but still would
like to know if there is a specific scenario, i.e. pre-retirement age,
income, etc, and then post retirement details, which combine to form the
ideal candidate for whom the low cost VA is a clear benefit over post
tax accounts.

JOE

Yes I have maximized all other vehicles available to me. This money
is what is left over from that. It is important to note that I am NOT
a "buy and hold" invetsor. Every so often, I make changes to the
portfolio which would trigger capital gains taxes. That is why a VA
works for me. I agree that for buy and holders it may not make that
much sense to go with a VA.- Hide quoted text -

On Aug 10, 10:33 am, Percy.Labr...@Gmail.com wrote:
Yes I have maximized all other vehicles available to me. This money
is what is left over from that. It is important to note that I am NOT
a "buy and hold" invetsor. Every so often, I make changes to the
portfolio which would trigger capital gains taxes. That is why a VA
works for me. I agree that for buy and holders it may not make that
much sense to go with a VA.- Hide quoted text -


Good for you on the dedicated saving. You are already ahead of the
game. FWIW I am pro-VA, not anti. But as you clearly understand they
are only suitable for certain situations. Yours may well be one of
them.

My concern for you was the fine print of THIS PARTICULAR ANNUITY.
According Jeff Nat, "Certain funds also have a transaction fee ranging
from $19.99 to $49.99 per transaction, depending on the number of
transactions per year." Even for buy and hold investors that makes me
nervous (auto rebalancing usually counts as transactions), but for a
trader that can be murder.

Jeff Nat goes on to state, "the customer pays fees of the underlying
funds selected (currently ranging from 0.23% - 2.72%... plus the fees
of any advisor hired)" Check out:

http://www.jeffnat.com/aboutourfunds/annuityfundperformance.cfm?

If you plan on trading in the sector specific funds (biotech, int'l,
health, tech, banking, etc) you are going to see expense ratios on the
upper end of that range.

This may be the best VA for you, but it may not. I am just advising
that you look at all the costs, not just the $20/mo.

Yes I have maximized all other vehicles available to me. This money
is what is left over from that. It is important to note that I am NOT
a "buy and hold" invetsor. Every so often, I make changes to the
portfolio which would trigger capital gains taxes. That is why a VA
works for me. I agree that for buy and holders it may not make that
much sense to go with a VA.

Most importantly, did you FULLY read the fine print on the Jefferson
National products? From the "monument advisor" page of their website:

* Jefferson National's Monument Advisor has a $20 flat insurance fee
on more than 97% of our underlying funds.

Certain funds also have a
transaction fee ranging from $19.99 to $49.99 per transaction,
depending on the number of transactions per year.

FWIW I am pro-VA, not anti.

"kastnna" <kast...@auburnalum.org> wrote in message
Certain funds also have a
transaction fee ranging from $19.99 to $49.99 per transaction,
depending on the number of transactions per year.

Yup. A whole 3% of the 165 funds offered. To avoid the transaction fee,
simply avoid those 3%. They are just the 5 index funds from Nationwide
Life.http://www.jeffnat.com/articles/MAFundGuide.pdf(any fund tagged with fn
28 - this info is repeated in prospectus)

"kastnna" <kast...@auburnalum.org> wrote

FWIW I am pro-VA, not anti.

Disclosure, please? Are you in any way involved in selling
VA products?

That disclosure makes him more credible, not less, in my
mind, at least at first blush. For reputable publications,
such disclosures are customary, in the interests of
optimizing information dispersal to the public.

That disclosure makes him more credible, not less, in my
mind, at least at first blush. For reputable
publications,
such disclosures are customary, in the interests of
optimizing information dispersal to the public.

That's definitely one way of looking at it. Others will
argue that I
sell them and I am therefore motivated to make people buy
them even if
it's not in their best interest. I often feel it's
lose-lose.

Back in 2006 you accused me of "generating a buzz"

Just my opinion, but I think you need to re-think this.
Deception or obfuscation is never well-received. E.g. people
finding out /after the fact/ that your line of work involves
the sale, to some extent of VAs will go over far less better
than simply being honest. Honesty sells. It's a win-win,
unless one's goals are short-term deception and a short-term
win, I guess.

"kastnna" <kastnna@auburnalum.org> wrote

Back in 2006 you accused me of "generating a buzz"


I expect more likely I queried you, and you took
the query as an accusation.

Deception or obfuscation is never well-received. E.g. people
finding out /after the fact/ that your line of work involves
the sale,

"Elle" <honda.lioness@nospam.earthlink.net> wrote in
message
news:13c1jhht9n6mje8@corp.supernews.com...
Deception or obfuscation is never well-received. E.g.
people
finding out /after the fact/ that your line of work
involves
the sale,

kastna has stated many times, in many replies,
that he is in the financial planning industry,

Elle wrote:
I actually took your words back then as an accusation
(unfounded at that): "Re selling stuff: It's about
generating buzz (and IMO not a
few urban legends within that buzz) as much as plugging
one's specific service."

And yet, in reputable publications, it's such common practice to disclose
possible conflicts of interest that one would think others would
contemplate and figure out why disclosures are done,

From the abstract of the paper discussed in the article: "As a result,
disclosure may fail to solve the problems created by conflicts of interest

Thanks for the post-o correction. Maybe you'd like to become
the group's official Post-o Cop? That would be a great
service.