In the days before reports were submitted on line, I would usually complete a form and fax it in. There was a gas station which I frequently shopped, and I noted on my report that there were no paper towels in the men's room. Once, as I was returning the men's room key, I mentioned to the attendant that there were no towels. He pointed to MY REPORT, where I immediately recognized my own handwriting, posted on the glass service bay window behind him, and said that someone kept reporting them for not having paper towels. He added that they did not provide them because people kept tossing them into the toilet and causing a clog requiring a plumber's attention. I had a hard time just letting that pass.

I wonder if some to the Nevada houses of joy seek mystery shoppers for evaluations of their experiences.

Well, that is true, but you must expect that the client would not want to pay this unnecessarily, and would hope either for someone local to the shop, or someone who has other reason to be in that area. Now, if the shop goes unfilled in the normal course, they will usually offer a "bonus," and that bonus is what would cover you for direct transportation costs or mileage for your vehile.

I liked the comment about the sum paid for purchases being tax deductible, but I am dubious of its validity.

First, if you are getting specifically reimbursed for the purchase, I do not think it is deductible, unless you count the reimbursement as income. However, if a shop pays a "flat fee," without distinguishing between reimbursement and payment for the service, I think that could be claimed as deductible.

Second, I think there is an analogy here to charitable contributions. If you make a contribution which would be tax deductible, you are supposed to reduce the amount of that contribution by the value of anything you get in return for the contribution. So, at least in theory, when a charity sends you a T shirt, or a coffee mug, or a ticket to some event, the deductible sum is supposed to be reduced by its value.

Now, theory is one thing, and practice is another. I suspect that only very rarely do taxpayers make this reduction from the reported contribution. And, unless you have very large contributions, you are unlikely to be audited. But, although I am a lawyer, I am not a tax practicioner (nor a CPA), so I can't comment from experience. If someone out there really knows the answer to these questions, I'd like to see it.

I don't think you can deduct you air far to Puerto Rico to do a coffee shop in San Juan! But, if you are already there, you could probably deduct your local cab fare to get to and from the shop. But not from the other side of the island, and you go to San Juan for a day trip.

If this really happened, it is tragic. If you could not afford a lawyer, a public defender should have been appointed for you. Unfortunately, while there is a constitutional mandate that those who cannot afford a lawyer are entitled to have one appointed for them (you have heard that part of the Miranda warnings on TV many times), there are several limitations on this principle that often make it ineffective. They all have to do with money. First, each jurisdiction establishes what the income standards are to qualify for an appointed lawyer, and in practice, usually only those who are completely impoverished will qualify. Those who have just a little income will neither qualify for an appointed lawyer, nor be able to hire one. Second, if a salaried public defender is appointed, they usually have such an unmanageably large case load that they have little time to give to each case. Third, if a private lawyer is appointed, this is frequently someone who lacks the experience or ability to attract clients on his/her own, and does not have the skills to be effective. And, if he does, the authorized pay for representing you is a small percentage (maybe 10%) of what a private lawyer would charge for the same work, so he has little incentive to put in the time to provide effective representation. As I said, it all comes down to money. When the city, county, or state has to allocate public funds for this purpose, how popular do you think it is to ask taxpayers to provide the funds to pay lawyers who will defend those accused of crimes?

Sometimes when I travel I check to see if there are any shops in the areas where I am going. I don't often find them, or I can't figure out exactly where they are relative to where I will be, but it is kind of fun to do these shops in a different area.

I have a different "accent" issue. When an employee is wearing a mask, it is sometimes more difficult to hear them, either because the volume is reduced or the mask kind of changes the accent. If that is further complicated by some accent, foreign to US, deep drawl, inner city dialect, it is all the more difficult. And, when all that is magnified because it comes over a drive through speaker, sometimes it is very frustration.

Sometimes I don't look carefully at the payment/reimbursement offered, and only realize afterward that advantage has been taken of me. I have been disappointed to find that, on occasion, the flat fee for the shop cannot cover the expense of the purchase, let alone the cost of getting to and returning from the shop site. I suggest that you look carefully at this, better than I sometimes do. If a merchant is not offering a reasonable amount for hte shop, DON'T TAKE IT, and perhaps they will have to up the pay to get takers. Now, if you are so hungry and so broke that it is worth it to get reimbursed, or mostly reimbursed for a meal, for which you have to spend time to review the instructions, time to do the shop, and time to complete the report, I can't criticize that you need this.

PS I once complained about this, that the minimum order, which required a beverage, could not be less than the reimbursement. I was told that I could have ordered water, and come in under the reimbursement. I never did another shop for that company!