Scott Anderson Financial
Scott Anderson has spent over 35 years in corporate accounting and finance after earning his MBA from Stanford University in 1975. Scott has worked in his own businesses, in venture capital start ups, and in corporate turnaround situations. He has served as Chief Financial Officer for two emerging public companies.
Starting in 1999 following an unplanned business transition, Scott earned his CPA, CFP® and EA certifications and began an active practice in tax, financial and investment planning for individuals and small business owners.
For over 30 years, Scott has been teaching the beginning accounting courses in undergraduate and graduate programs at several local colleges and universities in Southern California. Currently he serves as Adjunct Professor in Accounting at Chapman University. Scott taught accounting in the Pepperdine University MBA and undergraduate business programs prior to that. .
Scott is an active member of the National Association of Personal Financial Advisors (NAPFA), an organization which supports fee-only financial planning and the fiduciary standard of professional care.
Scott earned an undergraduate degree in Chemical Engineering from the University of Pennsylvania on a Naval ROTC scholarship and a Masters in Chemical Oceanography from the Scripps Institution of Oceanography at the University of California, San Diego prior to going on active duty. Scott served in Vietnam where he received several decorations and was an Navy admiral’s aide in Washington, D.C. during the summer of Watergate before leaving the Navy to pursue his MBA studies.
Scott and his wife live in Newport Beach, California. They have three married daughters.
MBA, Finance and Accounting, Stanford University Graduate School of Business
BS, Chemical Engineering, University of Pennsylvania
MS, Chemical Oceanography, Scripps Institution of Oceanography, UCSD
Assets Under Management:
A hedge fund "hedges" (i.e. makes shrewd guesses) over a publicly traded security, a group of securities, or the market and buys positions with the idea of a relatively near term gain. Hedge funds are traders at heart, looking for existing or anticipating anomalies or discontinuities in the market's pricing of securities.
A private equity fund takes investment positions in companies with the anticipation of a longer term return when the company goes public or is eventually sold. Private equity firms are investors and not traders.
Two different types of high risk investing. While there are always stories of a particular hedge fund or private equity fund doing well, it is usually the management of those funds that reap the benefits, not the investors, due to incentive compensation paid by the managers and the fact that each vehicle must make a lot of investments that will inevitably turn out to be loser. The trick is to have one or two "whales" that offset all the losers. The investors share in the whales, minus the losers, after management compensation.
There is risk and there is reward - you only get to pick one. If you pick high risk stocks like new stocks in a new industry, your reward could be great or you could lose all your money. That is also called speculating not investing. You can do the same thing in Las Vegas. Everyone is willing to take risks until they have lost their money and have nothing but regrets.
Investing is like watching paint dry. It is slow and steady but the color is beautiful when it dries. Pick an S&P 500 index ETF and forget trying to shoot for the moon. Not as exciting, but not as subject to blowing up on the launch pad or burning up in the atmosphere upon re-entry.
No. The DJIA is an index. There are ETFs and mutual funds that try to mimic the DJIA by holding the securities that are in the DJIA. Such funds can come close, but the management charges of the ETF plus the commission ,or broker fee charged to acquire the ETF, will cause a tracking error such that the actual performance of the ETF will be slightly less than the DJIA itself.
The tax on the conversion is based on the taxable income and thus, the tax rate in the year of the conversion. The lower the tax rate, the lower the tax on the conversion. Tax credits do not lower the tax rate, but do offset part of the amount of the tax due. So it is totally possible to have tax on the conversion, but end up paying no tax due to the credits. (Note, it is not clear to me why you are getting "tax credits" on the termination of the reverse mortgage. Be sure you understood exactly what they mean.)
The new regulations are basically saying that Edward Jones has to put your interests before theirs so they can no longer charge commissions. They are in the business of selling product, not giving advice.
You basically want a fee only planner who will always put your interests before the advisors interest. Check out NAPFA (National Association of Personal Financial Advisors) to learn more about fee only planning and to find advisors like that near you.