🐈
» Forums » Clients » Re: Why are expenses subject to fees the same...
Page options
6d27ffdb
Community Member

Why are expenses subject to fees the same as bonus

I don't see why an expense reimbursement should be subject to the same fees as a bonus or salary payment. 20% seems obscene.

Surely an expense reimbursement should be charged at: expense + cost of bank fees + small admin fee?

 

Thanks

 

 

 

45 REPLIES 45
emiguelina
Community Member


Toby B wrote:

I don't see why an expense reimbursement should be subject to the same fees as a bonus or salary payment. 20% seems obscene.

Surely an expense reimbursement should be charged at: expense + cost of bank fees + small admin fee?


Otherwise, It will be subject to be abused.

martina_plaschka
Community Member


Toby B wrote:

I don't see why an expense reimbursement should be subject to the same fees as a bonus or salary payment. 20% seems obscene.

Surely an expense reimbursement should be charged at: expense + cost of bank fees + small admin fee?

 

Thanks

 

 

 


Yes that's not ideal. You could find other ways to deal with expenses, such as giving the freelancer access to a payment method or paying them from your end as required. 

Is that allowable under the contract? If so then upwork shouldn’t advertise
expense payments as being different from bonus. I expected it to be handled
differently. Otherwise why ask the question in the UI?

Also for a small payment it’s a bit of a hassle getting the freelancer bank
details etc


Toby B wrote:
Also for a small payment it’s a bit of a hassle getting the freelancer bank details etc

You can not do that, you both can be suspended.

prestonhunter
Community Member

Toby, as a fundamentally honest person, you did not even realize that there are dishonest freelancers who would pressure their clients to pay all of their money through "expenses. In order to avoid paying fees. So a $100 project for graphic design would end up being a $5.00 fixed price payment, and a $95.00 expense payment.

In order to avoid having Upwork take out 20% from expense reimbursements, clients purchase the materials needed and send them directly to the freelancers. OR clients provide the freelancers with a company card or account for making purchases. For example, clients may provide freelancers with FedEx account numbers for doing shipping. OR clients pay feelancers a high enough hourly rate or fixed-price payment that freelancers can pay for needed expenses on their own. To answer your question: Yes, all of these options ARE allowable under Upwork's default contract and TOS.

Another lesser change that they could make would be to let the client choose to pay the fee.

 

--Jacob

I understand that but if avoiding abuse is the issue then why bother differentiating the two types of payment if the net result is the same.

 

I had an option to choose bonus or expense. I assumed I would pay fees on bonus but not on expense as that's usual business practice with taxes and so on.

 

If they are treated the same then upwork shouldn’t waste our time asking for unnecessary and therefore confusing information. There should be separate clear guidance explaining how to handle reimbursement of expenses.

 

To keep all finances on upwork then they could offer an expense handling system where freelancer submits the expense receipt and upwork then bills us as clients. That would prevent abuse.

Hi Toby,

 

I see you've received great advice here on the thread and I'll ask our team to follow up with you directly in order to provide more information about issuing payments on Upwork .

~ Vladimir
Upwork

I agree with toby, for example in one of my contracts I am also in charge of paying some premium extensions we are using such firewalls, and page builders. but when asking client to pay for those and payments is made I am getting only 90% of my real expenses. which is not what I want


Toby B wrote:

 

To keep all finances on upwork then they could offer an expense handling system where freelancer submits the expense receipt and upwork then bills us as clients. That would prevent abuse.


Sure, as long as they find a way to let those who require such a thing be the ones to pay the freight. I don't want my UW fees going up in order to provide extra services I don't need or use. 

 

Sorry, I see this is an old post, but I object to the implication that freelancers are the unscrupulous side here.  I work as a freelancer and have had multiple potential clients imply that taking the work outside of Upwork would be a more profitable option.  I have always dealt honestly with Upwork.  However, in this matter, Upwork is not being direct or honest with freelancers.  The fact that the expense fee is the same as every other fee is only directly stated on the CLIENT site.  You want to talk about dishonestly - when an expense is submitted on the client side, the freelancer gets an email calling it a bonus payment.  Further communication with Upwork has also only elicited talk of my "bonus payment" - there is no acknowledgement that it was a reimbursement.  There is clear obfuscation going on here on Upwork's part. But thanks, I love having my reputation as a freelancer impugned, while operating honestly at a loss.

Kendal

YOU are not the problem. Nobody is impugning your reputation.

4110e5f9
Community Member

This is a big problem. Why is reimbursement of expenses so **bleep** complicated with no one answer. Well you cant do it without Up,morelike Downwork taking a large cut through some, wrongly titled convoluted approach You can't contact upwork directly and ask them. They leave their clients alone to figure it out. I have a $500 expense that I will not "eat" nor take less in return. This is the least user-friendly app ever and not supported by customer service. Jeez, after this client, I'm done.

I'm probably posting to the wrong spot but who the heck knows. Jeez.

Douglas:

If a client reimburses a freelancer through Upwork the same fees apply that apply to all other client payments to a freelancer. I don't consider this complicated.

 

There is no reason for you to contact Upwork Customer Support about this. If you have questions about this, you are welcome to post your questions here in this thread.

Yeah, sure it’s real simple if you don’t mind eating the fee for the expense.  Which if the expense is $500 and the freelancer is at the top fee range, would be $100. If it was for a small project, that could mean operating at a loss.  Sorry, are you ok with that? Can I add a random $100 to a bill to you that I’m in no way entitled to? Or lets say we submit the expense to the client with the fee included, so we're not at a loss.  Upwork then gets a fee on the fee.

 

Upwork themselves makes it complicated with a bait and switch.  You say it’s a simple matter of the same fee applying, yet It is no where explicitly stated on the freelancer information side that the fee for an “Expense” is the same as their regular fee.  This is only found on the client side. I did talk to customer service and the article they sent me to “help” did not contain the word “Expense” a single time. Why is that?  If the client submits an expense payment, the freelancer receives notification of a “bonus payment”. In talking to customer service, despite my explicitly stating, in all caps, it was not a bonus payment, they continued calling it that, and did not refer to it as an expense or a reimbursement a single time.  It appears that through sheer denial and repetition Upwork believes the term “expense” can be made to fall under the category of “bonus payments”, despite the fact that they themselves separate it out on the client side. So if the two terms are interchangeable, I’m sure the IRS wouldn’t mind all of us marking year end bonuses as expenses, right?  Shall we try it, see how it goes?  Let me know.

 

If you do talk to customer service, they will, while not allowing your purchase in the clients behalf is an expense, state that for x purchase (not expenses in general) in the future, the client can reimburse you outside of Upwork.  Hence I now have permission to get reimbursed outside of Upwork for balloons and flowers. Real helpful Upwork, thanks so much! Clearly they’re missing the point that that’s a key reason we and our clients use Upwork.

 

It shouldn’t be complicated.  Add a reasonable convenience fee, and require documentation of the expense, just like all the other real businesses do. Will some people try to game the system? Yeah, but, hey at least there’s a paper trail they can follow rather than simply a blank space where thus inclined clients and freelancers quietly take their business outside of Upwork.


Kendal M wrote:

If you do talk to customer service, they will, while not allowing your purchase in the clients behalf is an expense, state that for x purchase (not expenses in general) in the future, the client can reimburse you outside of Upwork.  Hence I now have permission to get reimbursed outside of Upwork for balloons and flowers.


This is not allowed. The client can pay for whatever you need directly (Say you need stuff from Amazon, the client can use their Amazon account, pay for whatever it is, and have it shipped to you).

The client is NOT allowed to send the money to you directly, nor are you allowed to accept such a payment.

This wasn't my opinion or suggestion. See attached photo. This is direct from my conversation with Upwork Customer Service, where they told me the client could pay me outside Upwork in this case.

 

Direct payment is not always convenient or possible - especially in a worldwide market. I think the general feeling is, if Upwork offers the expense option, then they should do so in a way that is honest and reasonable to both Client and Freelancer.

 

**Edited for Community Guidelines**


Kendal M wrote:

This wasn't my opinion or suggestion. See attached photo. This is direct from my conversation with Upwork Customer Service, where they told me the client could pay me outside Upwork in this case.


If that's what they told you, they told you the wrong thing.

 

Thank you for the reply. I think a reimbursement by definition, is 100% of
the value. And that’s why they won’t call it that and have instead over
complicated the matter so they can share in it.

**Edited for Community Guidelines**

 

Sorry you're having a rough go of it because you, like me, had the reasonable expectation that expenses would not have the same fee as everything else and are now feeling cheated... You CAN contact customer service - go through the website, not the app - and they may give you permission to accept other payment.  Of course it will still depend on the client as to whether they are willing to set up alternate payment... 


Kendal M wrote:

**Edited for Community Guidelines**

 

Sorry you're having a rough go of it because you, like me, had the reasonable expectation that expenses would not have the same fee as everything else and are now feeling cheated... You CAN contact customer service - go through the website, not the app - and they may give you permission to accept other payment.  Of course it will still depend on the client as to whether they are willing to set up alternate payment... 


**Edited for Community Guidelines**

 

While it's true that UW never explicitly states that expense reimbursements are subject to the same fee as other payments, it is never expressed or implied that expense reimbursements are treated any differently than any other payments. If you assume they will be handled differently, then you wind up disappointed. 

 

There's no practical way for UW to exempt expense reimbursement from the fee structure without creating opportunity for massive fraud on the part of unscrupulous users. That's the reality of a global, online platform and it becomes part of the equation for each of us as we determine whether it's a good fit for our respective businesses.

 

BTW, we don't call ourselves "Gurus", that's UW's doing. I don't even know the basis of it -- kudos? Solutions? In any case, here's a pro tip: Time and again, we've seen that veteran FLs -- and Petra, in particular, thanks in part to her photographic memory -- provide more accurate information than some of the frontline CS staff. And here's one more: This is a public forum and clients frequent it, too. That makes it worth considering whether lashing out at people who are generously providing answers to one's questions is a good look.

 

That these are "perreniel complaints", shows there is a problem or, at the very least, that the service could be improved.  You know how to make any problem impossible to solve? Don't even TRY to fix it.  As it stands the expense situation is 100% in Upwork's favor, so what motivation do they have to even try to find a more equitable solution? Especially if "experienced FLs" discourage and belittle the "obtuse and unrealistic" Upwork users into meek acceptance.  While you may wish to help, the feeling from Gurus that people should just be "realistic" and they have themselves to blame reads loud and clear through the responses.  And THAT is why I took umbrage.

 

You may call it "obtuse and unrealistic", but I call it striving to be better. There can be no advancement if everyone just accepts things can't be changed.  If clients read this and don't share my outrage both at the dishonesty and general apathy toward the situation, frankly, we wouldn't be a good fit anyhow, as it speaks to a person who would be satisfied with so-so and dishonesty when it suits them.

In the Upwork world, expenses don’t exist, period. We can talk to the hand
which doesn’t acknowledge or respond , or we can figure it out on our own.
I have , it’s a fealty one can choose to accept or not.


Kendal M wrote:

That these are "perreniel complaints", shows there is a problem or, at the very least, that the service could be improved.  You know how to make any problem impossible to solve? Don't even TRY to fix it.  As it stands the expense situation is 100% in Upwork's favor, so what motivation do they have to even try to find a more equitable solution? Especially if "experienced FLs" discourage and belittle the "obtuse and unrealistic" Upwork users into meek acceptance.  While you may wish to help, the feeling from Gurus that people should just be "realistic" and they have themselves to blame reads loud and clear through the responses.  And THAT is why I took umbrage.

 

You may call it "obtuse and unrealistic", but I call it striving to be better. There can be no advancement if everyone just accepts things can't be changed.  If clients read this and don't share my outrage both at the dishonesty and general apathy toward the situation, frankly, we wouldn't be a good fit anyhow, as it speaks to a person who would be satisfied with so-so and dishonesty when it suits them.


Perennial complaints do not necessarily reflect a problem the platform needs to solve. Often, they highlight an aspect of the platform that people dislike who are either new or haven't fully grasped UW's business model and its strategies. 

 

This global platform includes millions of FLs and thousands and thousands of clients, a discernible proportion of whom have no scruples whatsoever when it comes to bilking each other, bilking UW and, therefore, the rest of us law-abiding users. What do you think would happen if UW created a means for FLs to bill clients for pass-through expenses, exempt from the UW user fee? Do you think there might be a tidal wave of "expense" invoices instead of project feen billings? UW would have to build infrastructure to process all those transactions including rigorous auditing. And it could only hope to be partially effective. It would simply give the unscrupulous a way to circumvent paying fees without the bother of leaving the platform. Personally, I don't want the fees I pay being used for such a fool's errand. Is it a nuisance that we can't bill expense reimbursement through UW? Of course. Can we find ways to work around it? Yes.

 

As for it being in UW's financial interest to keep things as they are, I'd be gobsmacked if total annual revenue realized from fees on expense reimbursement even shows up in any but the most granular spreadsheet. The business case for not taking measures to "make things better" in this regard is about the investment required and the money that would be lost anyway through the newly created opportunity for fraud. Refusing to accept that reality is what I call obtuse and unrealistic.

 

If you want to advance society and make things better and more equitable, that's great. I am inclined that way myself and I participate in actions in my life in pursuit of that vision, including choices about the work I accept and the clients I work with. Upwork is a for-profit business that offers certain tools that are useful to me in my business. When I use it, I agree to comply with its terms and policies. The ones I consider counter-productive for the platform, the ones that impede my ability to make money -- and UW's ability to profit from my profit -- I complain about, loud and long and with some regularity. But the ones that are part of UW's core business model as a global platform serving the entire FL marketplace from bottom to top and horizon to horizon -- those, we each find a way to adapt or go look for a tool that fits us better.

 

Since I have a head of steam going, I'll offer an alternative perspective on what you refer to as gurus "blaming the victim." This gets trotted out most often when someone comes to the forum complaining about some aspect of Big, Bad, Upwork or championing a solution to a "problem" that only affects a small proportion of the user base -- sometimes just that poster -- and the community response isn't what they'd hoped. Typically, people weigh in with direct, clear insights about options going forward, how to avoid the problem in the future, why the inconvenience exists and how to work around it, along with experienced and clear-eyed advice. Sometimes the OP takes the input at face value, considers how it fits her/his situation, asks relevant follow-up questions, and formulates their next steps. Sometimes the OP gets defensive and takes umbrage, lashes out at the FLs who are trying to help, digs in behind their original point of view and refuses to engage productively with anyone who doesn't offer unconditional positive endorsement of their complaints. Those people wind up feeling "blamed". That's fine, it's their choice. But the guru-bashing gets tiresome, sometimes.

 

 


Phyllis G wrote:

Kendal M wrote:

That these are "perreniel complaints", shows there is a problem or, at the very least, that the service could be improved.  You know how to make any problem impossible to solve? Don't even TRY to fix it.  As it stands the expense situation is 100% in Upwork's favor, so what motivation do they have to even try to find a more equitable solution? Especially if "experienced FLs" discourage and belittle the "obtuse and unrealistic" Upwork users into meek acceptance.  While you may wish to help, the feeling from Gurus that people should just be "realistic" and they have themselves to blame reads loud and clear through the responses.  And THAT is why I took umbrage.

 

You may call it "obtuse and unrealistic", but I call it striving to be better. There can be no advancement if everyone just accepts things can't be changed.  If clients read this and don't share my outrage both at the dishonesty and general apathy toward the situation, frankly, we wouldn't be a good fit anyhow, as it speaks to a person who would be satisfied with so-so and dishonesty when it suits them.


Perennial complaints do not necessarily reflect a problem the platform needs to solve. Often, they highlight an aspect of the platform that people dislike who are either new or haven't fully grasped UW's business model and its strategies. 

 

This global platform includes millions of FLs and thousands and thousands of clients, a discernible proportion of whom have no scruples whatsoever when it comes to bilking each other, bilking UW and, therefore, the rest of us law-abiding users. What do you think would happen if UW created a means for FLs to bill clients for pass-through expenses, exempt from the UW user fee? Do you think there might be a tidal wave of "expense" invoices instead of project feen billings? UW would have to build infrastructure to process all those transactions including rigorous auditing. And it could only hope to be partially effective. It would simply give the unscrupulous a way to circumvent paying fees without the bother of leaving the platform. Personally, I don't want the fees I pay being used for such a fool's errand. Is it a nuisance that we can't bill expense reimbursement through UW? Of course. Can we find ways to work around it? Yes.

 

As for it being in UW's financial interest to keep things as they are, I'd be gobsmacked if total annual revenue realized from fees on expense reimbursement even shows up in any but the most granular spreadsheet. The business case for not taking measures to "make things better" in this regard is about the investment required and the money that would be lost anyway through the newly created opportunity for fraud. Refusing to accept that reality is what I call obtuse and unrealistic.

 

If you want to advance society and make things better and more equitable, that's great. I am inclined that way myself and I participate in actions in my life in pursuit of that vision, including choices about the work I accept and the clients I work with. Upwork is a for-profit business that offers certain tools that are useful to me in my business. When I use it, I agree to comply with its terms and policies. The ones I consider counter-productive for the platform, the ones that impede my ability to make money -- and UW's ability to profit from my profit -- I complain about, loud and long and with some regularity. But the ones that are part of UW's core business model as a global platform serving the entire FL marketplace from bottom to top and horizon to horizon -- those, we each find a way to adapt or go look for a tool that fits us better.

 

Since I have a head of steam going, I'll offer an alternative perspective on what you refer to as gurus "blaming the victim." This gets trotted out most often when someone comes to the forum complaining about some aspect of Big, Bad, Upwork or championing a solution to a "problem" that only affects a small proportion of the user base -- sometimes just that poster -- and the community response isn't what they'd hoped. Typically, people weigh in with direct, clear insights about options going forward, how to avoid the problem in the future, why the inconvenience exists and how to work around it, along with experienced and clear-eyed advice. Sometimes the OP takes the input at face value, considers how it fits her/his situation, asks relevant follow-up questions, and formulates their next steps. Sometimes the OP gets defensive and takes umbrage, lashes out at the FLs who are trying to help, digs in behind their original point of view and refuses to engage productively with anyone who doesn't offer unconditional positive endorsement of their complaints. Those people wind up feeling "blamed". That's fine, it's their choice. But the guru-bashing gets tiresome, sometimes.

 

Adding to Phyllis' thoughts-

I take strong exception to being labelled an "obnoxious know-it-all". I am, in fact, an obnoxious, know-it-all guru, and I would like all newcomers to the forum to kindly remember that.   


 

Sorry Reinier, didn't have that post up and misspelled your name.

 

One last thought and I swear I'm done.  You ever met someone who works with kids and has clearly been doing it too long and is burnt out? There's a harshness in them. Right now especially, people on these boards are newbs, possibly working online or remotely for the first time in their lives. So if you find you can't summon any empathy for a person going through a big life adjustment, or your first instinct is to sneer at the ungrateful little wretches complaining about free advice, perhaps it may be time to take a break from the boards.

Yeah, I know I'm beating my head against a rock, but since you're so into owning up to your own part in a problem, you may want to read over some boards again.  I did not object to WHAT was said - the advice honestly had no bearing on me one way or another - I object to HOW it was said.  Read the responses. Ask yourself: Were they condescending? Were they harsh and/or impatient?

 

It's all well and good to feel you're smarter than everybody and know more than Upwork CS (Renier, kind of making my point there buddy), but it's also good to remember that even arrogant people find arrogance in others unattractive and abrasive, so "Gurus", although possibly offering useful tidbits, often do it in such a way that they are unpalatable. Have you, as a woman in business with, I'm guessing, better than average computer skills, never been "helped" by a stereotypical IT guy? Ultimately they may provide assistance, but do you not get off the phone or close the email feeling steamed, thinking "What a condescending jerk"? They may not call you stupid directly, but it is implied in every space and full stop.  "Why does this have to be so complicated?" A: "I don't consider this complicated." Implication: You are stupid and I am smart. If that was not the feeling here, I sincerely apologize, but it could easily be interpreted that way, especially in the case of someone already feeling frustrated.

 

Furthermore, it's great to feel that you know how the system works and how to work the system, but it's also good to be aware of your limitations.  Time and again I see some form of the line it's better to ask us than CS. Not saying that's necessarilty untrue, but let's say the worst case scenario happens and Upwork litigates a freelancer. If it was due to their following your advice, are YOU going to go to court in their behalf?  Which do you think would offer more protection: "Well, your honor, this freelancer said I should do it. No I don't know them or where they live or what they do, but they're a guru with over 4,000 kudos." OR "This is an email from Upwork's own Customer Service Representative, recommending I take this action."

 

Also, I don't know you or Petra or any other guru, so when you make a "This isn't allowed", you're wrong and they're wrong, statement, why should any freelancer just take your word on it? You want to be helpful, cite your source. Based my understanding of x part of the contract [link here], you could risk being removed from the site for doing this. Have you considered...instead?

 

You can say, we're here to offer solutions not hold hands or kiss boo boos, but unless you're a hunt and peck typer, how much extra effort or time does it really take to acknowledge someones feelings before saying why that isn't the case, or just a Yeah, Switching to a remote platform from a traditional business model has a bit of a learning curve. Unfortunately we've all misstepped and had to pay our dues. You can say "This is business", but my guess is a modicum of *kindness* (and possibly a little less of all freelancers are evil scum - which I see way more often than "guru bashing") would make it so your advice and solutions went a lot further. And yes, I think the "bashing" would lessen too.


Kendal M wrote:

Yeah, I know I'm beating my head against a rock, but since you're so into owning up to your own part in a problem, you may want to read over some boards again.  I did not object to WHAT was said - the advice honestly had no bearing on me one way or another - I object to HOW it was said.  Read the responses. Ask yourself: Were they condescending? Were they harsh and/or impatient?

 

It's all well and good to feel you're smarter than everybody and know more than Upwork CS (Renier, kind of making my point there buddy), but it's also good to remember that even arrogant people find arrogance in others unattractive and abrasive, so "Gurus", although possibly offering useful tidbits, often do it in such a way that they are unpalatable. Have you, as a woman in business with, I'm guessing, better than average computer skills, never been "helped" by a stereotypical IT guy? Ultimately they may provide assistance, but do you not get off the phone or close the email feeling steamed, thinking "What a condescending jerk"? They may not call you stupid directly, but it is implied in every space and full stop.  "Why does this have to be so complicated?" A: "I don't consider this complicated." Implication: You are stupid and I am smart. If that was not the feeling here, I sincerely apologize, but it could easily be interpreted that way, especially in the case of someone already feeling frustrated.

 

Furthermore, it's great to feel that you know how the system works and how to work the system, but it's also good to be aware of your limitations.  Time and again I see some form of the line it's better to ask us than CS. Not saying that's necessarilty untrue, but let's say the worst case scenario happens and Upwork litigates a freelancer. If it was due to their following your advice, are YOU going to go to court in their behalf?  Which do you think would offer more protection: "Well, your honor, this freelancer said I should do it. No I don't know them or where they live or what they do, but they're a guru with over 4,000 kudos." OR "This is an email from Upwork's own Customer Service Representative, recommending I take this action."

 

Also, I don't know you or Petra or any other guru, so when you make a "This isn't allowed", you're wrong and they're wrong, statement, why should any freelancer just take your word on it? You want to be helpful, cite your source. Based my understanding of x part of the contract [link here], you could risk being removed from the site for doing this. Have you considered...instead?

 

You can say, we're here to offer solutions not hold hands or kiss boo boos, but unless you're a hunt and peck typer, how much extra effort or time does it really take to acknowledge someones feelings before saying why that isn't the case, or just a Yeah, Switching to a remote platform from a traditional business model has a bit of a learning curve. Unfortunately we've all misstepped and had to pay our dues. You can say "This is business", but my guess is a modicum of *kindness* (and possibly a little less of all freelancers are evil scum - which I see way more often than "guru bashing") would make it so your advice and solutions went a lot further. And yes, I think the "bashing" would lessen too.

 

Kendal, 

I was not "owning up" to anything. I made my comment with my tongue firmly in my cheek. Other members who know me know that I do that on occasion.  

Here's the thing though; none of us was born wise to the ways of Upwork. When we started out here, we also had to learn how things worked. Some asked questions on these boards, and took what we needed from the replies and advice we received.   

 

Most of us studied the tons of helpful material Upwork supplies until it came out of our ears. Most of also read and studied the Terms of Service before we dived into things, so we did not have to "take some obnoxious guru's word" for anything. The rules are in the ToS, and that was what was quoted at you. Who knows, one day you might be in a position to do the same for someone else. 

 

Sure, some of us made mistakes, and some of us will make more mistakes, but the thing is that we are professionals before we are freelancers. Therefore, when we make mistakes, we own up to them, learn from them, and then move on. We don't blame the gurus, who are gurus only becasue they posted a certain number of times in the Community. We also don't blame Upwork, or the man in the moon.  

 

Nobody condescended to you. The advice you were given was based on the ToS, and you would do well to read and study them before you do much else. Nobody here wants to see you fail at earning a living as a freelancer, but how soon you start doing that depends as much on your attitude towards more experienced freelancers, as it does on your skills.   

 


 

The expression of humour (exemplified in Reinier's post), kindness and condescension are amongst many things that that are affected by culture and primary language. A huge number of posts that aim upset at gurus misinterpret what is intended as being direct as condescending, being humourous as mocking, and sharing knowledge as arrogant. The list goes on. The complaints would be fewer if people remembered that not everyone expresses themselves as they do.

 

But the kindness is in most posts that respond to a query. It's in taking the time and trouble to bother responding in the first place.

 

To get off this tangential circle and back to the question, this is what
I've determined:

Upwork does not recognize or permit expense reimbursements, full stop.
Since they, by definition, are 100% reimbursable there is no share for them
to keep. If you wish to categorize your expense reimbursement as income,
which they can take from, they want your business.

Upwork customer service - forget about it - doesn't exist. they utilize a f
akakta system that has their customers rely on other customers for answers.
Why? Because they don't have to pay them. Quite conversely the gurus are
likely paying Upwork for the privilege to perform the service. Upwork is a
public corporation whose duty is to its shareholders and bottom line, not
necessarily it's customers; this is corporate America at it's finest.

Thank you for getting this back on topic.

 

At the very least, though, if the client bills it as an expense the type will show up as expense in Transaction History - so you at least won't get audited if you deduct it from next year's taxes rather than adding it to your income.

 

Upwork is doing something hinky here; it doesn't add up. The Client: Expense, Freelancer: Bonus, Transaction History: Expense cycle makes no sense, and looks super guilty even if everything they're doing is aboveboard.  I don't think I'll be leaving money in my Upwork account lest they misstep off this tightrope they're walking on and end up under federal investigation. 

Strictly for the benefit of inexperienced FLs who may be following along... There is nothing nefarious going on. There is no practical way for UW to handle pass-through expenses without creating a massive fraud opportunity, and no reason to invest in trying. When direct expenses are called for, experienced users handle them one of two ways. The client pays directly and arranges delivery or access for the FL, or the FL absorbs the cost as a business expense and sets their fee accordingly. No muss, no fuss.

 

Thank you. Sure was a long circuitous path to a well stated short answer. I
would add that one needs to be mindful of taxation and this is a limitation
to the services provided by by Upwork that they should take ownership of
and forego the suggested “bonus” resolution- which it isn’t.

“The client pays directly and arranges delivery or access for the FL, or
the FL absorbs the cost as a business expense and sets their fee
accordingly.”




Kendal M wrote:

 

Upwork is doing something hinky here; it doesn't add up. The Client: Expense, Freelancer: Bonus, Transaction History: Expense cycle makes no sense, and looks super guilty even if everything they're doing is aboveboard.  I don't think I'll be leaving money in my Upwork account lest they misstep off this tightrope they're walking on and end up under federal investigation. 


Why would you want to leave money in your Upwork account? It's not as though it will pay you interest. I withdraw it practically the minute it's available, the 5 day security period is long enough payment delay.

Now, I'm not a lawyer, so this is just a layperson's interpretation, but the Upwork legal pages section pertaining to freelancer fees states:
Pursuant to the User Agreement, we charge Freelancers a Service Fee for each payment their Client makes to the Freelancer on a Service Contract.
source: https://www.upwork.com/legal#fees 

So until the federal govenment decides that payment for expenses should not be considered payment, I think Upwork is on solid ground.

__________________________________________________
"No good deed goes unpunished." -- Clare Boothe Luce

Kendal, Douglas and others,

 

Thanks for the discussion and sharing feedback about the expense option and Freelancer Service Fee. I'm not aware of any immediate plans to change the way Freelancer Service Fee is structured. It applies to all types of payments in the same way (only exceptions being payments from Enterprise clients and Upwork Payroll.) That said, I do see an opportunity to clarify that the Service Fee is applied to expense payments on the site and in our help articles so that both clients and freelancers are aware of it. We'll share this feedback with our product team.

 

 

~ Valeria
Upwork

Thank you Valeria,

I believe a little consistency and transparency in the matter would be beneficial.

 

And obviously a change is fee structure is not possible, not with only an $84 Million R&D budget.  **Edited for Community Guidelines**

All,

 

I'd like to follow up here with a reminder to keep the conversation professional and avoid interpersonal disputes and personal attacks when posting on these boards. I understand that opinions differ and everybody's experience of the platform will be different. We encourage constructive feedback and discussion. However, being disrespectful toward other members, personal attacks based on a user's  experience of Upwork platform or any other disparaging comments will not be tolerated.

 

A few posts have been edited or removed from this thread as they were against the Community Guidelines and values.

~ Valeria
Upwork


Douglas P wrote:
Quite conversely the gurus are likely paying Upwork for the privilege to perform the service. 

No-one pays to post on the forum.  (What would be the point of that?)

 

The 'guru' label is one imposed by Upwork after a certain number of posts and perceived usefulness. Like all the labels, it isn't one we can accept or refuse. There is no privilege involved.

Latest Articles
Learning Paths