I, too, shop for the desire rather than need of it, so I might be choosier than some about the fee. On the other hand, as much as a no-fee shop rubs me the wrong way, as it does others, I weigh the total payment.
Examples: I had a haircut shop that paid $15 plus $18 reimbursement. Sounded good until I failed to properly vet the client; the cost of a cut, shampoo, and tip (forget the blow-dry) cost me almost $30. A haircut-only was $20, so even without a tip, I wasn't reimbursed fully. I ended up netting a small shop fee.
I recently did a restaurant take out shop that reimbursed $30. No fee. I considered it fair. Afterward, I saw dine in shops for the same restaurant paying $5 and reimbursing $25. A lot more work for the same price. It was a no-thank-you no-brainer for me.
It seems that MSPs might be better off paying one set amount to include reimbursement instead of setting a separate shop fee plus the reimbursement amount, although it might not work for all shops.
I just realized that, for shoppers whose livelihoods depend on this profession, a shop fee would count fully as income, where as reimbursement might not. Hmm.
Oh. Now I just read the post about the above-cited issue. I wonder if the MSCs could call it reimbursement if they paid a set fee, which could be over the actual reimbursement so that only the excess would be called a shop fee and count as income. I also wonder if any states consider reimbursement a benefit of the job so
do consider it income.