How are the $1 salaries that CEOs sometimes take considered legal?
"Part of your first link has this statement that I suspect you are missing: However, Section 13(a)(1) of the FLSA provides an exemption from both   minimum wage and overtime pay for employees employed as bona fide   executive, administrative, professional and outside sales employees. Note that executive is in that list. As for the additional note: To qualify for exemption, employees generally must meet certain tests   regarding their job duties and be paid on a salary basis at not less   than $455 per week. Generally which means, ""in most cases; usually."" is not a universal qualifier and thus exceptions can exist. I'd imagine that restricted stock could be a way around some of the rules as there would be a monetary value there in the case of the stock for companies of a particular size." "Even under the executive exemption, see Exemption for Executive Employees Under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) Section 13(a)(1) as defined by Regulations, 29 CFR Part 541, it seems that a minimum compensation is required. To qualify for the executive employee exemption, all of the following tests must be met: The employee must be compensated on a salary basis (as defined in the regulations) at a rate not less than $455 per week... etc. There is one other possibility under FLSA Section 13(a)(1), as a ""bona fide exempt executive"". Exemption of Business Owners   Under a special rule for business owners, an employee who owns at least a bona fide 20-percent equity   interest in the enterprise in which employed, regardless of the type   of business organization (e.g., corporation, partnership, or other),   and who is actively engaged in its management, is considered a bona   fide exempt executive." "Taxable fringe benefits are included in taxable wages for the purpose of FLSA. So when those executives get to use company cars or company jets that value is ""wage"" even if it isn't salary."
"This question feels like an EL&U question to me, and so I will treat it as one. Investment, noun form of to invest, originally from the Latin investire, meaning to clothe, means: [T]o commit (money) in order to earn a financial return Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary, Invest, vb. tr., definition 1 As such, when a person commits money with the purpose of earning a financial return, they are investing.  Playing the lottery, when done so for the purpose of financial return, would fall under this definition - even if it's a poor choice.   Gambling, verb tense of to gamble, likely originally from the word gamen, meaning to play, means: a :  to play a game for money or property b :  to bet on an uncertain outcome Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary, Gamble, vb. itr., definition 1 Playing the lottery is clearly gambling (as a lottery is a game, by definition). The second definition could well include investing in the stock market, particularly certain kinds of investments (derivatives, currency speculation, for example). Aside from the definitions, however, normal usage clearly favors investment to be something with an expectation of positive return, while gambling is taking a risk without that expectation (rather with the hope of positive return).  Legally, as well, playing the lottery is not something that is considered investment (so it is taxed differently).  However, the question was ""Can"", and by definition, clearly it can be (assuming you are not asking legally)." "Its a good question. Off the top of my head I would suggest to revoke their licenses to do business, and involuntary dissolution of the corporate entity. Mandatory sale of all assets including customer lists and other intangibles to the highest bidder. The entity would essentially be absorbed by other businesses in their industry so the industry and economy as a whole probably wouldn't be affected too much by the ""execution."" The shareholders would lose a lot obviously because the proceeds from the fire sale would probably be way lower than FMV. But fuck the shareholders, investing carries risk and their business failed. The relatively innocent employees could go work in the other businesses that bought up OldCo's assets. Higher level corporate executives should have to take personal responsibility legally. This is similar to how SOX requires the CEO and CFO to take personal responsibility for the financial statements they prepare and publish, with penalties up to and including millions of dollars of fines and jail time.  But of course, as long as I'm dreaming, I'd like a pony too as the saying goes." "This is not an end-all answer but it'll get you started I have been through accounting courses in college as well as worked as a contractor (files as sole proprietor) for a few years but IANAA (I am not an accountant). Following @MasonWheeler's answer, if you're making that much money you should hire a bean counter to at least overlook your bookkeeping. What type of business? First, if you're the sole owner of the business you will most likely file as a sole proprietorship. If you don't have an official business entity, you should get it registered officially asap, and file under that name. The problem with sole proprietorships is liability. If you get sued, not only are your business' assets vulnerable but they can go after your personal assets too (including house/cars/etc). Legally, you and your business are considered one and the same. To avoid liability issues, you could setup a S corporation. Basically, the business is considered it's own entity and legal matters can only take as much as the business owns. You gain more protection but if you don't explicitly keep your business finances separate from your personal finances, you can get into a lot of trouble. Also, corporations generally pay out more in taxes. Technically, since the business is it's own entity you'll need to pay yourself a 'reasonable salary'. If you skip the salary and pay yourself the profits directly (ie evade being taxed on income/salary) the IRS will shut you down (that's one of the leading causes of corporations being shut down). You can also pay distribute bonuses on top of that but it would be wise to burn the words 'within reason' into your memory first. The tax man gets mad if you short him on payroll taxes.  S corporations are complicated, if you go that route definitely seek help from an accountant. Bookkeeping If you're not willing to pay a full time accountant you'll need to do a lot of studying about how this works. Generally, even if you have a sole proprietorship it's best to have a separate bank account for all of your business transactions. Every source/drain of money will fall into one of 3 categories... Assets - What your business owns: Assets can be categorized by liquidity. Meaning how fast you can transform them directly into cash. Just because a company is worth a lot doesn't necessarily mean it has a lot of cash. Some assets depreciate (lose value over time) whereas some are very hard to transform back into cash based on the value and/or market fluctuations (like property). Liabilities - What you owe others and what others owe you: Everything you owe and everything that is owed to you gets tracked. Just like credit cards, it's completely possible to owe more than you own as long as you can pay the interest to maintain the loans. Equity - the net worth of the company: The approach they commonly teach in schools is called double-entry bookkeeping where they use the equation: In practice I prefer the following because it makes more sense: Basically, if you account for everything correctly both sides of the equation should match up. If you choose to go the sole proprietorship route, it's smart to track everything I've mentioned above but you can choose to keep things simple by just looking at your Equity. Equity, the heart of your business... Basically, every transaction you make having to do with your business can be simplified down to debits (money/value) increasing and credits (money/value) decreasing. For a very simple company you can assess this by looking at net profits. Which can be calculated with: Revenues, are made up of money earned by services performed and goods sold. Expenses are made up of operating costs, materials, payroll, consumables, interest on liabilities, etc. Basically, if you brought in 250K but it cost you 100K to make that happen, you've made 150K for the year in profit. So, for your taxes you can count up all the money you've made (Revenues), subtract all of the money you've paid out (Expenses) and you'll know how much profit you've made. The profit is what you pay taxes on. The kicker is, there are gray areas when it comes to deducting expenses. For instance, you can deduct the expense of using your car for business but you need to keep a log and can only expense the miles you traveled explicitly for business. Same goes for deducting dedicated workspaces in your house. Basically, do the research if you're not 100% sure about a deduction. If you don't keep detailed books and try to expense stuff without proof, you can get in trouble if the IRS comes knocking. There are always mythical stories about 'that one guy' who wrote off his boat on his taxes but in reality, you can go to jail for tax fraud if you do that. It comes down to this. At the end of the year, if your business took in a ton of money you'll owe a lot in taxes. The better you can justify your expenses, the more you can reduce that debt. One last thing. You'll also have to pay your personal federal/state taxes (including self-employment tax). That means medicare/social security, etc. If this is your first foray into self-employment you're probably not familiar with the fact that 1099 employers pick up 1/2 of the 15% medicare/social security bill. Typically, if you have an idea of what you make annually, you should be paying this out throughout the year. My pay as a contractor was always erratic so I usually paid it out once/twice a year. It's better to pay too much than too little because the gov't will give you back the money you overpaid. At the end of the day, paying taxed sucks more if you're self-employed but it balances out because you can make a lot more money. If as you said, you've broken six figures, hire a damn accountant/adviser to help you out and start reading. When people say, ""a business degree will help you advance in any field,"" it's subjects like accounting are core requirements to become a business undergrad. If you don't have time for more school and don't want to pay somebody else to take care of it, there's plenty of written material to learn it on your own. It's not rocket surgery, just basic arithmetic and a lot of business jargon (ie almost as much as technology)." 1.If the compensation that I receive is over 10 lakhs, how much would be deducted as tax No tax will be deducted by the company. You have to calculate the tax and pay in Advance by yourself. There are quite a few Banks that give you online facility to pay your tax. There is no service tax. Otherwise the tax slabs are right. The current budget has slightly revised the tax brackets. 2.So are these the right taxes and % that Need to be paid? If not do let me know the correct deductions. Yes. Revised brackets for financial year 2014-2015 are NIL for first 2.5 lakhs. Other brackets are unchanged. 4.What others legal options I have to decrease the tax liability? As an employee of my ex company I had once taken an FD (that reduced my tax) The options are same as salaried, i.e. you can claim exemption under 80C or on interest of housing loan, etc. As a consultant certain expenses can also be deducted.  You should also talk to a CA who can help you with this as there will be some paperwork involved. It's wrong in several situations:  One, the business owner counts this as a business expense, which it is not, and therefore reduces the company's profit and taxes. That would be tax avoidance and probably criminal.  Two, someone who is not the sole owner counts this as a business expense, which it is not, reduces the company's profit and when profits are shared, the company pays out less money to the other owners. That's probably fraud.  Third, if the owner or owners of a limited liability company draw out lots of money from the company with the intent that the company should go bankrupt with tons of debt that the owners are not going to pay, while keeping the money they siphoned off for themselves. That would probably bankruptcy fraud.  Apart from being wrong, there is the obvious risk that you lose control over your company's and your own expenses, and might be in for a nasty surprise if the company has to pay out money and there's nothing left. That would be ordinary stupidity. If you have to tell your employees that you can't pay their salaries but offer them to admire your brand new Ferrari, that's something I'd consider deeply unethical. Well, there's also the related matter that the rate of pay increase for average workers has increased at a small fraction of executive pay. There are many ways to remedy this, including raising top tax rates (though by no means exclusively). I'm not quite sure what you're shooting for here... if you're trying to determine that people put more thought into a $1000 purchase than a $1.50 purchase it might be helpful.  I honestly can't tell you who the CEO of Coke (Dasani water) or Pepsi (Aquafina water) is. I can tell you that the CEO of HP has talked about getting out of the PC business and his actions in the purchase of and subsequent mismanagement of Palm would have an impact as to whether or not I'm confident in handing his company 1/2 a paycheck. A combination of market research and tax law would likely be the combination used to set the salary. An elaboration of each: Taxes - In Canada and the US there can be differences in how payments are treated if they are salary,e.g. payroll taxes such as CPP, Social Security and others may apply in this case as well as personal income tax rates, or dividends, which may have different treatments in some jurisdictions I believe. If salary above $250,000 is taxed at 40% and dividends are taxed at 15%, which rate would you rather pay? (This is hypothetical as no jurisdiction has been noted here yet.) Most provinces and states in North America will tax the first few dollars at rather low rates and so it isn't bad to take a nominal rate of $1 or so in salary as usually the higher rates exist for higher salaries. Executive Compensation has come under scrutiny in recent years though it is usually a mix of salary, bonuses, and stock either restricted or options. Market Research - Some companies may research what other small public companies would pay executives as the salary may have to be approved by a board of directors in some cases. At least this would be how I remember things being decided in small companies I worked for in Washington State and the province of Alberta. In a lot of company cases, excess earnings are stored and if there is enough of a pile then a special dividend may be given out though some corporate structures like REITs force dividends to maintain their tax status. Note the payment in dividend here requires that the President be able to dictate what happens with the cash in the bank of a company which isn't going to be the case for the regular employee. Also, the dividends here would go to all the shareholders and thus if there are people besides the President owning shares they would also get their portion based on what they own.