But, today is Monday. The Super Bowl is over. The work week is beginning. And, we’ve all got holiday bills, broken-down cars, and other difficulties to take care of. A Federal tax refund check would be pretty handy right now.

What if your employer has not sent your W-2? What do you do?

What if they sent it, but to the wrong address?

How long do you wait before doing anything at all? When do you call the IRS? And where do you call?

Here are a few quick answers that I hope can at least give you an idea about where to start. I’ve taken these answers straight from the horse’s mouth at IRS.gov. I highly suggest you make that site your first stop for any questions about filing, any forms, etc. It is actually very well-laid-out and helpful. And, it beats trying to call the IRS hotline by a long shot, especially this time of year.

Please note the February 14 date in Step 2 below. Before that date, only call the IRS if you know that your employer is not going to have your W-2s sent. Before that date, the IRS will simply tell you to wait.

—————————

Employers have until January 31, 2011 to send you a 2010 Form W-2 earnings statement.
If you haven’t received your W-2, follow these four steps:

1. Contact your employer If you have not received your W-2, contact your employer to inquire if and when the W-2 was mailed. If it was mailed, it may have been returned to the employer because of an incorrect or incomplete address. After contacting the employer, allow a reasonable amount of time for them to resend or to issue the W-2.

2. Contact the IRS If you do not receive your W-2 by February 14th, contact the IRS for assistance at 800-829-1040. When you call, you must provide your name, address, city and state, including zip code, Social Security number, phone number and have the following information:
• Employer’s name, address, city and state, including zip code and phone number
• Dates of employment
• An estimate of the wages you earned, the federal income tax withheld, and when you worked for that employer during 2010. The estimate should be based on year-to-date information from your final pay stub or leave-and-earnings statement, if possible.

3. File your return You still must file your tax return or request an extension to file April 18, 2011, even if you do not receive your Form W-2. If you have not received your Form W-2 by the due date, and have completed steps 1 and 2, you may use Form 4852, Substitute for Form W-2, Wage and Tax Statement. Attach Form 4852 to the return, estimating income and withholding taxes as accurately as possible. There may be a delay in any refund due while the information is verified.

4. File a Form 1040X On occasion, you may receive your missing W-2 after you filed your return using Form 4852, and the information may be different from what you reported on your return. If this happens, you must amend your return by filing a Form 1040X, Amended U.S. Individual Income Tax Return.

Form 4852, Form 1040X, and instructions are available at http://www.irs.gov or by calling 800-TAX-FORM (800-829-3676).

Zuckerberg is certainly not the only exec to do this. In the wake of the Wall Street financial crisis, the salaries of CEOs have come under public scrutiny, particularly those whose customers lost lots of money. So, some companies have made hay out of the fact that their CEO takes a relatively modest salary.

But, a $1 CEO is a different breed. Why would Zuckerberg do it? No one lost any money due to Facebook’s market maneuvers or unregulated activities. Overall approval of Facebook in general is high. Public opinion of Zuckerberg is good, especially after the movie “The Social Network“. Zuckerberg is a capitalist hero, a geek wunderkind, the model of everything both the left and right love in America. Who would blame him for taking his company public, then raking in billions off something that not one user has to pay for?

What about other $1 execs? Others who have been listed as having single-digit salaries include Apple’s Steve Jobs, Chrysler’s Lee Iacocca, New York mayor Michael Bloomberg, former California governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, HP’s Meg Whitman, and the Google triumvirate of Sergey Brin, Larry Page and Eric Schmidt.

The public perception of these salaries is, and is intended to be, that these execs are sacrificing for the sake of the company or municipality they are overseeing. And, it is not to say that altruistic intentions are not involved, especially in the case of execs at the helm of a company they started.

In the case of elected officials like Schwarzenegger and Bloomberg, the low salary reflects a commitment to turn around a bad situation they were elected to fix. It endears them to voters and constituents. The rewards in terms of public goodwill are great.

The actions of these men hearken back to a time when America was clawing its way out of a bad spot. Around World War I, many business executives came to serve in branches of the U.S. government where they had business expertise. These execs took only a single dollar in salary and were called One-Dollar Men.

Lee Iacocca was brought in to turn around a failing Chrysler Corporation in 1978. Iacocca had been run out of Ford Motor Company after overseeing the public fiasco that was the Ford Pinto. His reputation was on the rocks due to his “safety doesn’t sell” statements about the fire-hazard pinto. But, Chrysler recognized that Iacocca was, under all the public hype, still an excellent top man.

Iacocca took a $1 annual salary from Chrysler, which drew attention to his efforts as a rescuer of the company, a core part of America’s auto industry. It also helped rehabilitate Iacocca’s public image.

The public image advantages to taking a low salary are easy to see, whether in a failing-company scenario or in the case of a government leader working to turn around a state.

But, are there actually financial advantages to an exec who takes a very low salary to run a successful company? There certainly could be.

1) Lower Taxes. This one is simple. Payroll taxes are higher than taxes on capital gains in the United States. This fact has led to many political arguments in the past couple of years, and has become much more common knowledge as a result.

Mark Zuckerberg’s current outright salary is $600,000 per year. In terms of payroll tax, he is in a 35% tax bracket. If, however, he reduces his salary to $1 and takes stock options instead – a great deal for a company with an IPO like Facebook – he deals with capital gains tax, which is currently at 15%. Zuckerberg currently holds 28.2% of the company.

This makes sense, but let’s get a little crazy with the possibilities here.

2) No Taxes. Imagine this one, as proposed in a CNBC story. If Zuckerberg were to forego and future bonuses or additional stock rewards, and not cash out any stock (resulting in capital gains), he would effectively have an income of $1 a year, all while building a fortune as his stock rises, splits, etc. He has accrued enough money to live comfortably, though not extravagantly, for a while. To have no tax burden at all, continually plowing your resources back in on themselves, will build an even bigger legacy.

3) Living On Debt. Even once Zuckerberg’s savings runs out, he could live off a Home Equity Line of Credit. CNBC explains that scenario:

People sometimes talk about the rich “living off the interest” of their wealth. But that’s not really a tax efficient way to live if you are really, really wealthy. It’s better to live off of debt and muni bonds.

The best thing for Zuckerberg would be a home equity line of credit—perhaps multiple home equity lines. He would borrow against the value of real estate he owns. The money he receives from the HELOC is debt rather than income, which means it isn’t taxed. Even better, the interest he pays on the HELOC can be used to offset other income he may earn.

4) Taxpayer Money. This one is highly unlikely, but it is possible. If Mark Zuckerberg shows an income between $1 and $13,650 (2011 tables), he could qualify for Earned Income Tax Credit, even without children. Sounds silly, but there it is. with up to three children, he could collect up to $5,751 dollars in EIC per year, as well as Medicaid and Food Stamp benefits.

Now, this is not to say that Mark Zuckerberg intends to do any of these things, except maybe #1. But, once you have made your bones in business at the level of a Zuckerberg, the possibilities change. The planning can change. You don’t worry about things that many “normal” people worry about. You don’t care when W-2s arrive. You don’t concern yourself with bounced check fees. And, you don’t plan your tax strategy with “normal people” considerations like home mortgage interest, charitable contributions and job hunting expenses. These things are used, but they are not the core of your strategy.

Adding zeroes to the end of some of your numbers allows you to reduce the number most “normal people” worry about to a single dollar, and still build a kingdom.

And, you can give it away.

On December 9, 2010, Mark Zuckerberg, along with Bill Gates and Warren Buffett signed a “Giving Pledge” in which they promised to donate at least half their wealth over the course of time to charity. These men are all listed in the Top Twenty of Forbe’s World’s Most Powerful People (Gates is #5, Zuckerberg # 9, Buffett #20). They could do a lot in the world with the combination of wealth and influence they hold. Gates, for example, has long taken on the eradication of malaria from the Earth as his personal mission. And, in the past 10 years, incidence of malaria in the world has gone down 20%.

As big ticket financial advisers would say, “The more you keep, the more you can give away.”

Like clockwork every year, you can tell when W2s hit. Look for tax prep software ads to hit the TV tonight with a vengeance. Then, in two weeks, ads for home theater systems and Blu-Ray players will hit. Then, all the prices for stuff on Craigslist will go up.

Here’s how W2 Day played out on Twitter so far today. Most of these are from people who got their forms today. Tonight, look for tons of “Where the hell’s my W2?” tweets.

I got my W2 form work today & don’t know what to do with them. I never filed taxes before. I always just give W2 paper to my mom.

— Natacha(@TachabLESSED) February 2, 2012

Ralph Lauren Co and AE are both 2 days late on my w2 should have received it no later than January 31st says my teacher

— Dr.Archelaos (@iLLiNouT) February 2, 2012

So I Got My W2 #thankgod

— Skits(@ThatDudeSkits) February 2, 2012

Do strippers get W2 forms?

— Antoine Lewis (@Boss_Tweezy) February 1, 2012

How many of yall looked at ur W2 & thought “dis has to be a mistake I know I made more then this.”

— Chicken & Watermelon (@DJYABOYEARL) January 31, 2012

Today is February 1st ! Woopty dooooo!!! I know my W2′s needa be in my mailbox when I wake up.

— Kristin Victri (@iamPinkk_Lipss) February 1, 2012

W2 shawty get bak watchu worked for

— #YCB CIROCBOY (@IamYungDonnie) January 30, 2012

I never been so Happy to get my W2

— Gabby (@GabbyAndrea) January 28, 2012

Got my w2′s in the mail today. Some of y’all prolly don’t know what that is though.

— Ricky Thompson(@RickySuave_YG) January 28, 2012

Whats a W2? #bigkidproblems

— BigKidProblems (@BigKidProblems) January 27, 2012

I can’t wait to get home to check this mailbox to look for this W2 to get this bank roll on you boys!!

— Dr. Coynell X(@Mr_Tenaha) January 26, 2012

Every year when I get my W2 in the mail for taxes, I just go…. “Jeeze… where’d THAT all go?!”

— Derevka (@Derevka) January 26, 2012

My w2 is coming through in the clutch. Tax return is gonna be baller status this year

— Chelsey Butrum (@CRaeBut) January 26, 2012

Legitimate tax return prep offices and other businesses offers “refund anticipation loans”, whereby you have your refund sent to their bank account and they give you most of it in advance in cash. But, these kinds of services do place restrictions on who they will offer loans to, based on any tax offsets due, filing status changes from prior years, etc.

But, since these services are highly-advertised and have become commonplace, people are falling prey to scams that offer such services. These scams are blended with high-tech methods of phishing and information collection that go further than tax season. One scam even asks for your mother’s maiden name, which is a common identifier when resetting or revealing other passwords.

Learn more about these scams, how to spot them, and how to report them.

H&R Block At Home tax preparation software is one of the most commonly used tax tools available.

“Just being able to claim one more deduction that you didn’t know about could mean the difference of hundreds of dollars more in your pocket,” said Justin Bowen, CEO of CouponBuzz.com.

40% of American taxpayers do their own taxes each year. If a taxpayer underpays the federal government, it is highly likely that they are going to hear about it. But if a taxpayer overpays the federal government, well, Uncle Sam isn’t going to track them down and offer it back.

The Brazilian government will give tax breaks to Foxconn for the production of tablets specified as weighing under 750 grams and lacking keyboards. The taxes that will be affected are the Excise Tax (IPI), Social Contribution Tax (PIS), and Federal Contribution Tax (COFINS)

Here’s the relevant chunk, as reported by Brazilian newspaper Folha (google translation):

According to the ministerial decree published Wednesday in the “Official Gazette”, the company will be entitled to the benefits provided for in Decree 5906 of September 2006. The determination provides for exemption or reduction of the IPI (Excise Tax), PIS and Cofins for companies investing in research and development of technology products.

According to the ordinance today, the rule will apply to tablets with touch screens, no keyboard and weighing less than 750 grams. Also included as accessories, cables, power supplies and manuals that are related to the tablets.

The expectation is that Foxconn start producing devices – especially the iPad from Apple – the factory in Jundiai, São Paulo.

The $12 billion deal to bring Apple manufacturing to Brazil hit some roadblocks in 2011. From Foxconn’s end, it was the ridiculous bureaucracy and high tax rates in Brazil that held up production. From the Brazilian government’s end, Foxconn was simply demanding insane tax breaks.

iPad production was supposed to kick off in July 2011, but these differences of opinion held it back. With the passing of these new incentives, it follows that Foxconn’s Brazilian plant should start pumping out Apple tablets in no time.

[Via AppleInsider]

A report from Bloomberg, citing “people with knowledge of the matter,” has come out saying that the IRS is auditing “how Google avoided federal income taxes by shifting profit into offshore subsidiaries.” The report says:

The agency is bringing more than typical scrutiny to how the company valued software rights and other intellectual property it licensed abroad, said the person, who requested anonymity because the audit isn’t public. The IRS has requested information from Google about its offshore deals after three acquisitions, including its $1.65 billion purchase of YouTube, the person said. The transfer overseas of these kinds of rights has enabled Google to attribute earnings to foreign units that pay lower taxes, Bloomberg News reported a year ago.

This is certainly not the first we’ve heard of companies engaging in this kind of shifting of finances.

Google isn’t commenting beyond, “This is a routine inquiry,” and the IRS is prohibited by law to discuss specific taxpayers.

This news comes on the day that Google is set to reveal its third quarter financial results. The call is scheduled for 4:30 EST. Check back to WebProNews for coverage of that.

In the op-ed, entitled “Stop Coddling the Super-Rich,” Buffett makes the case that taxes need to be raised on the wealthiest Americans, and that the future of our country economically depends on this action. He writes that the super-rich, himself included, have been “spared” of having to make any real sacrifice:

OUR leaders have asked for “shared sacrifice.” But when they did the asking, they spared me. I checked with my mega-rich friends to learn what pain they were expecting. They, too, were left untouched.

Buffett makes the argument that most of his “mega-rich” friends “wouldn’t mind being told to pay more taxes” if it meant they could help their fellow citizens who are suffering and their country that they love. Buffett’s suggestion is this:

I would leave rates for 99.7 percent of taxpayers unchanged and continue the current 2-percentage-point reduction in the employee contribution to the payroll tax. This cut helps the poor and the middle class, who need every break they can get.

But for those making more than $1 million — there were 236,883 such households in 2009 — I would raise rates immediately on taxable income in excess of $1 million, including, of course, dividends and capital gains. And for those who make $10 million or more — there were 8,274 in 2009 — I would suggest an additional increase in rate.

Some of the language he used in the piece is quite direct and has set Twitter ablaze with discussion. His piece is generating so much buzz that he is trending worldwide – as is the phrase “Stop Coddling the Super,” an obvious reference to his op-ed title.

Here’s the only problem, Twitter: the man you’re so fervently discussing isn’t an all-you-can eat food trough. Yes, “Warren Buffet” is trending instead of “Buffett.” Sigh.

Spelling errors aside, Twitter is a hot spot for economic debate right now – with both sides of the argument being represented. First, the Buffett supporters -

And the flip side –

What do you think? Let us know in the comments.

Essentially, the bill calls for a federal set of guidelines for how states should collect taxes from online retailers. This has been a hot button issue lately. It blew up recently as Amazon and others shut down affiliate programs in California to avoid taxes, causing harm to small businesses who had relied them.

Amazon and eBay have presented opposing views to such a bill. Amazon is supporting it, while eBay says it will harm small retailers. PCMag shares the following statement from Brian Bieron, eBay’s senior director, of federal government relations and global public policy:

“A collection of state tax commissioners have again been able to get an outdated Internet sales tax bill introduced in Congress, but we are confident that it will be rejected because it would harm small Internet retailers. Better policy is reflected by H.Res. 95 from Congressman Dan Lungren (R-CA) and Congresswoman Zoe Lofgren (D-CA) with 27 bipartisan co-sponsors, which says that Congress won’t give states ‘the authority to impose unfair tax collecting requirements on small online businesses.’”

“The giant retailers jockeying for new Internet sales taxes have national store networks that they combine with their major online sales platforms, a business model they know brings some tax collection duties. Forcing small businesses to take on the same costs and tax burdens as national retail businesses is unrealistic, unfair and will unbalance the playing field between giant retailers and small business retailers on the Internet.”

The House bill says states would be authorized to “require all sellers not qualifying for the small seller exception to collect and remit sales and use taxes with respect to remote sales sourced to that Member State under the Agreement.”

In Section 3 of the bill, as presented in the House of Representatives, it says Congress makes the following findings:

(1) States should be encouraged to simplify their sales and use tax systems.

(6) Online consumer privacy is of paramount importance to the growth of electronic commerce and must be protected.

The whole House Bill can be read here. Information regarding the Senate Bill is here, but the full text is as of yet unavailable.

Was this a wise move by the California government? Tell us what you think.

Democrat Governor Jerry Brown has called it a “common sense idea,” according to one report from the LA Times. Though clearly many disagree with that notion, thinking that it will do more harm that good. Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos has said in the past that the company is protected in the U.S. constitution’s prohibition of state’s interference in interstate commerce:

And in the U.S., the Constitution prohibits states from interfering in interstate commerce. And there was a Supreme Court case decades ago that clarified that businesses — it was mail-order at that time because the Internet did not exist — that mail-order companies could not be required to collect sales tax in states where they didn’t have what’s called “nexus.”

So there’s that, but as my colleague Josh Wolford noted in a recent related article about Texas, more and more states are saying that Amazon affiliates count as physical presences and are enacting sales tax regulations already.

That’s why Amazon has been shutting down affiliate programs. Amazon has told affiliates in the past that they’d have to move to another state to continue earning commissions on referrals. Overstock.com has reportedly done that before too.

It’s worth noting that California’s sales tax rate in general will be dropping to 7.75%. Here is the bill that was signed into law (pdf).

Some groups representing brick and mortars feel the law should be extended on a national level, claiming the taxes take away competitive advantages from Internet retailers that don’t have a physical presence in a particular state. Consumers are able to avoid fees from purchasing from these retailers that they’d otherwise have to pay by buying in-state.

Affiliates have been informed of the termination of their contracts with Amazon. They have received a letter from Amazon saying:

(The bill) specifically imposes the collection of taxes from consumers on sales by online retailers – including but not limited to those referred by California-based marketing affiliates like you – even if those retailers have no physical presence in the state.

We oppose this bill because it is unconstitutional and counterproductive. It is supported by big-box retailers, most of which are based outside California, that seek to harm the affiliate advertising programs of their competitors. Similar legislation in other states has led to job and income losses, and little, if any, new tax revenue. We deeply regret that we must take this action.

Danny Sullivan, a California resident wrote Bezos an open letter “thanking him” on his personal blog Daggle. It begins:

“Thank you for your letter today, informing me that after seven years of being one of your affiliates — and having earned for you about $150,000 in that time — that you “deeply regret” unilaterally terminating my contract with Amazon to be an affiliate. I also especially appreciated the part where you reassured me that this action wouldn’t affect my ability to keep buying from your company. Nice touch.”

He goes on to add that while he is fortunate enough to have a successful day job, the loss of income will have a far greater impact on many other affiliates. He also makes a good point about how Amazon will continue to get paid from existing affiliate links without the actual affiliates getting paid.

“I’m not sure how many affiliate links I have on the blog,” Sullivan writes. “Not that many, maybe 25 to 50 in all. But until about an hour ago, those links were worth something to you. Now, because of your squabble over the sales tax issue, you’ve decided to just take for free what you’d previously paid for. If I don’t find time to track down and kill those links, you keep grabbing orders that get made through them and keeping the cut I previously received”

“Over the next day or so, you’re going to get a lot of orders this way,” he adds. “Bigger affiliates will eventually move. Plenty of smaller ones won’t be bothered to change. But those small ones that don’t will add up into plenty of money for your company. You, of all companies, really understand how all that long tail stuff can mount up, right?”

Danny makes some fair points, but the fact that the law was passed is likely to drive businesses away from the state, as clearly they will have no choice if they wish to continue relying on Amazon for income.

jjlwils55, commenting on the LA Times report says, “Okay, here’s the answer…start buying products from overseas companies.  In this day of internet technology, this is a job killer and at the end of the day will not raise additional taxes.”

In the same thread, a small business owner says his company was a victim of similar circumstances all the way back in the early 80′s. “We operated out of Pennsylvania until they ‘needed $65 million’ and ‘targeted only 4 industries’ for a ‘new sales and use tax’. Lots of Exemptions only to the connected cronies in Harrisburg (lawyers of course). WE VOTED WITH OUR FEET AND MOVED TO FLORIDA. We moved the Business and Six Families after ‘growing up there’. We are still angry.”

From the sound of it, there are plenty of people getting ready to pick up and move, or at least consider it, as a result of this California law now. But how long before they are greeted with similar issues at their next destination. You can see how the ordeal has been playing out in various states in this map from TheStreet.com:

Amazon isn’t the only one the law will affect, by the way – just the biggest.

What do you think? Should states tax online retailers the way California is doing? Should about federal law? Share your thoughts in the comments.