dee shops Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> No, it is not "always a loss." Your tax-provider
> should be talking to you about the total $ you
> make for the year, not on one specific job. You
> will lose money on some jobs and make money on
> others. You will have expenses that you should be
> deducting from your income. Then you figure your
> taxes. If you never ever do any jobs that pay you
> cash for doing them, then your situation is
> different. But you would not claim the
> reimbursements as income, either, according to
> what I know. However, again, each person should
> be listening to their own tax provider.
How is it not ALWAYS a loss? If you go to a restaurant and are reimbursed for your actual cost of meal, tip, taxes, valet, etc. and receive no fee for your report. Unless I'm walking to the restaurant, I have mileage which is not reimbursed. Therefore, it is a loss. $35 Reimbursement less $35 Meal cost less $2.00 in mileage (it's very close) equals a $2.00 loss for that particular job.
Now, say it was a restaurant at the mall and you're already at the mall doing another job and you don't have any extra mileage. You receive $35 Reimbursement less $35 for Meal cost and your Profit is $0. You don't have a loss, but it's break even at best.
I understand that retail stores often use a loss leader to entice shoppers into their stores to buy higher profit margin items. So, for a mystery shopper, the theory would be to take loss jobs in order to build a relationship with a scheduler in order to get higher paying jobs. I understand that too. I just don't understand taking jobs that will automatically result in a loss on a regular basis. To me, it seems contrary to the principles of running a business for a profit.