FOR THE MANY MILLIONS OF AMERICANS IN CLEAR NEED OF EXTRA INCOME, yet unable to find employment in the community for reasons outside their direct control (among them age, disability, emotional disorders and the need to care for infants or elderly relatives @ home), "work-from-home" offers are too often seen as the only ticket they have towards that end.

Yet, the Inconvenient Truth thereof is that the vast majority of widely-advertised "work-from-home" offers are really "make-work/fake-work" scams such as the old reliable "envelope stuffing," a/k/a "home mailing," with significant potential for loss of the limited savings the vulnerable can ill afford to lose to the weird and unwholesome behind such otherwise well-intentioned ur-hiring calls.

Never mind where many of those advertising "home mailing" positions claim to supply all relevant materials for what they glowingly describe as "easy, pleasant work" for only a few hours a day from home, earning as much as $2-5/envelope "stuffed and mailed to us in accordance with our instructions" is unlikely to be as profitable as advertised--even with suspiciously-glowing-sounding testimonials sometimes used. And I say "unlikely" because the economies of automation and scale give mailroom-service companies an unfair advantage on companies pleading for home mailers "desperately," and then some.

The Postal Service will tell you for a fact that mailroom services can handle a high-volume mailing job in under 2-3 hours, thanks to the economies afforded them of high-volume filling, sorting, bar-coding and traying of each individual piece of mail in said mailings--which, for the companies involved in these mailings, translates into special postage discounts depending on how far the pre-sorting is carried out with an eye towards saving time and work for the Postal Service ahead of entry into the mailstream.

And for a substantial fraction of the cost and time "home mailing" workers can expect to complete such "easy [and] pleasant" tasks in!

=============

SO WHAT EXACTLY MOTIVATES COMPANIES TO CONTINUE ADVERTISING "WORK-FROM-HOME" SCAMS in as blatant a manner as they do, paritcularly so in disreputable or otherwise questionable media channels like supermarket tabloids and "business opportunity" magazines?

And knowing (un)consciously all the while that such are unlikely to produce, for the average homeworker needing to keep their hands busy (but cannot by more conventional means), the significant and measurable incomes they advertise so glowingly, let alone realising the "why and wherefore" such is unlikely?

Your Correspondent, perhaps, has a likely answer such "work-from-home" companies will easily resort to as a patsy: Videlicet, that they are operating "for tax reasons" rather than bona fide employment.

Said "tax reasons" involving, more than likely, "maximising tax credits" for what is basically an enterprise unlikely to generate viable profits for reasons the properitors/perpetrators are (un)consciously (un)aware of, yet fail to recognise for their own selfish ends.

Said "tax credits" those in the "work-from-home" game seek to "maximise" all the more would have to include such involving business expenses like:

• Advertising and promotional expense;
• Printing and postage; and
• "Legal retainers" in case certain of their homeworkers start complaining about false or misleading advertising, exploiting the vulnerable, usw.

Not to mention the possibility of maxing out on credits available to companies offering employment to those in high- or extreme-risk "target groups" vis-a-vis dependency upon welfare, such as:

• those in economically-disadvantaged communities, or such in clear and present danger thereof;
• the disabled;
• displaced workers;
• veterans readjusting to civilian life; and
• children from "dysfunctional" or "high-risk" families, especially such deemed "chronic and habitual welfare cases," soon to leave high school.

And let's not forget the potential for exploiting tax incentives available to employers under "workfare" programmes in the several states for making jobs available to welfare cases just to fulfill the "mere formality" of "work experience" now required of eligible welfare cases.

Taken together, such "tax credits" could more than offset the obvious losses these "work-from-home" companies are more than likely to be earning in matter of fact. Never mind that said "tax credits and incentives" are probably fraudulent themselves in view of the inherently fraudulent nature of their business models and paradigms.

Now you know the "how and why" of "work-from-home" companies taking potentially unscrupulous advantage of the vulnerable.

Which can be summarised thus:

"We are only running this company for tax reasons."

So what is the IRS doing about this?