MYSTERY SHOPPING THREAD 19 - please don't mention client names or fees on here!!

_nate

DevilsAdvocate1 wrote: »

The other thing is tax. I know someone who was investigated and subsequently taxed on all her reimbursements. She tried to argue that the reimbursements were necessary to do the job, therefore they were not taxable. However, this argument was not accepted because she also did jobs where there was no fee. In the end they charged her tax based on a second hand value of the goods (basically half the price she paid).
D.

That's really disturbing to hear. My argument regarding assignments without fees would be that they build goodwill with the agency and lead to more fee-paying work being assigned. I would staunchly defend the necessity of purchases in order to conduct these mystery scenarios and would not consider them taxable benefits.

spender

Unfortunately I think the tax people would not be interested in us building goodwill with the companies, they would probably just see it as a taxable benefit. However I have yet to complete my first tax return (started after last tax year started) so I may be wrong.

jen_br

Yup I refuse to do reimbursement only I rather the company take 1.00 off the reimbursement and make it a fee!

Flygirl767

But isn't the secret eating place reimbursment only? No one seems to have a problem doing these visits!

lalli_pickle

I've just had the best proof reading query ever.

" . "

After my previous posts, I'm not sure if they're trying to tell me something or if they've genuinely made a mistake :rotfl:

Lil_Me_2

Nothing wrong with doing reimbursement only jobs, as long as you declare it as a taxable benefit! So if you pay 20% tax it's an 80% discount, which if you were going to buy it anyway is alright.

polythenegirl

Lil_Me wrote: »

Nothing wrong with doing reimbursement only jobs, as long as you declare it as a taxable benefit! So if you pay 20% tax it's an 80% discount, which if you were going to buy it anyway is alright.

Which is what I was tryign to get at earlier - just not got the brain gear to do that today - been a long day!

ButterPie_2

Plus, if you are under the tax threshold, it is still basically something for free, and often it can go on ebay, or it is a meal that you would have had to buy anyway...
I try to only do "free meals" as part of a full day of mystery shopping (or at least I have done up to now, hark at me trying to sound all experienced!), as I see it as more of a perk of the job than anything. I will have already bought my travel pass for the day, so I might as well get a half decent meal out of it while I'm out.

lalli_pickle

Lil_Me wrote: »

Nothing wrong with doing reimbursement only jobs, as long as you declare it as a taxable benefit! So if you pay 20% tax it's an 80% discount, which if you were going to buy it anyway is alright.

And with a lot of them, once you've deducted mileage it works out at even less

DevilsAdvocate1

_nate wrote: »

That's really disturbing to hear. My argument regarding assignments without fees would be that they build goodwill with the agency and lead to more fee-paying work being assigned. I would staunchly defend the necessity of purchases in order to conduct these mystery scenarios and would not consider them taxable benefits.

The person involved paid for an accountant to help her argue this point and the concession was made that 50% of all the reimbursements for all the jobs she had done would be taxable. The tax office did not relent.

And if you work another job already and do lots of Gapburgers mainly for the fee, you could end up being taxed on the whole thing (gutting for me as I just used to take one bite, one chip and throw the rest away).

D.