The rise of job offer scams
Scam texts have exploded in recent years (which I probably don't have to tell you — if you have a cellphone, you're most likely well aware). Consumers reported losing $470 million to text message scams in 2024, according to the Federal Trade Commission, five times the amount reported in 2020. The actual amount of money lost could be much higher, given that many people don't alert the FTC when scammed. Fake package delivery was the most common scam, but the No. 2 was job offers — texts from purported recruiters either offering positions at well-known companies or promising big bucks in exchange for doing online tasks that seem relatively mundane.
"We are definitely seeing both a growth in reported losses to text scams and also a growth in reported losses to job scams," says Kati Daffan, an attorney for the FTC in its Bureau of Consumer Protection. "Reported losses to job scams increased more than three times between 2020 and 2023."
Now, the flood of job scams could get even worse. There is increased opportunity for dupers: The labor market is getting rockier, Americans are increasingly on edge about their finances, and many people really want to work remotely. At the same time, the means of cranking out these texts is getting more sophisticated: AI makes scam texts easier to craft in ways that seem plausible and realistic. The overall result is that unsuspecting job seekers may become even more susceptible to hoaxes.
"It's likely that as unemployment increases and more people are worried about the economic uncertainty, if the scams aren't necessarily increasing, the likelihood that people might fall for them will be," says Selena Larson, a staff threat researcher at Proofpoint, a cybersecurity company.
The way scam texts work is pretty straightforward: You get a message out of nowhere about a supposed thrilling work opportunity. It may come from a phone number, or it's from an official-looking email address. The offer seems enticing, albeit somewhat unrealistic given how jobs and money usually go — it may promise a super-high salary for just a couple of hours a day of menial online work. It can also come with some weird facets, such as conducting interviews entirely via text, promising to pay in crypto, or asking you to pay them before they pay you.
Eva Velasquez, the CEO of the Identity Theft Resource Center, a nonprofit, says her organization saw a big bump in job scam reports in 2023 that took them by surprise. Since then, the number has ebbed and flowed, but the scams are here to stay. "They are very lucrative. They can capture not only your data but often your money," she says.
Scammers get people to hand over personal information that would be par for the course for a legit hiring process — Social Security numbers, pictures of their driver's licenses and passports, bank account numbers. That information can be used to try to steal people's identities and for other nefarious ends. And for someone who really wants a new job, the mundanity of the requests can be deceiving. "That I think is why it's confusing to people is when you have a legitimate offer and you do start with an employer, they do need that information," Velasquez says.
What's not so normal is job scammers asking victims to kick in their own money. The trick goes like this: After supposedly hiring someone or getting far enough in the process, the scammer will send someone a check and ask them to buy work-related equipment with it, such as a printer or office supplies. But the check will be for more money than the stuff costs, so they'll ask the person to send the difference back. Later, the check bounces, and the person is out of the money they spent on the equipment and sent to the scammer — and, potentially, in hot water for depositing a fake check. They may also ask people to buy gift cards or make payments to fake vendors who are in on the scam.
Daffan, from the FTC, says it has specifically seen a spike in task scams, in which consumers are asked to complete little activities online, such as liking videos or rating products on an app or platform, to earn commission. The texts say the activity is for "product boosting" or "app optimization," which can sound realistic. "But then once people start doing this work, there's a whole system designed to trick them to actually pay money into the app, and eventually, they'll end up losing money and never being given any of the money that they were promised," Daffan says.
And as much as many people like to feel that they'd never fall for a scam, we're all susceptible to them, to some extent.
"It relies on this concept of social engineering and the hackers being very compelling. They make you feel something, they make you feel excited," Larson says. "They make you feel like you want to be a part of this ecosystem, that this job is a great opportunity that you don't want to lose."
The stereotypical victim of a fraudster is an older person — your grandmother on the phone with someone who claims to be from Publishers Clearing House, telling her she's won a million dollars but has to kick in some of her own cash first. But in the modern world, that stereotype is out of date, including when it comes to job text scams: A lot of young people take the bait.
Gen Zers and millennials are used to doing everything online, even making major life decisions. Nothing, whether it's booking a vacation, renting an apartment, or paying a friend back, feels like a "big screen" task anymore, let alone a do-this-in-person one. It's all on the small screen.
"I'm a Gen Xer. For me, someone conducting very serious business over text just doesn't resonate with me," Velasquez says. "For young people, they're like, we do everything over text. It doesn't raise alarm bells."
You look at the Gen Zs and the younger millennials and they just click, click, click, click, click, click.
Younger people are more accustomed to the idea of side hustles. They're in the hunt for extra cash, especially if they can earn it with little effort online, and "like these videos for money" may not seem that abnormal to them in a world where "post videos on TikTok for money" is an aspired-to reality.
Gen Z also faces an especially tough job market. Between tech layoffs and federal government job cuts, many avenues they may have pursued have dried up. Companies aren't hiring the way they were a few years ago, and people with jobs aren't quitting. That can specifically affect younger people looking to get a foot in the door — if nobody's going out, they can't get in. The result: a generation that's extra prone to falling into scams offering jobs and side-hustle cash.
"You look at the Gen Zs and the younger millennials and they just click, click, click, click, click, click," says Alex Quilici, the CEO of YouMail, a service that helps block scam texts and calls.
As I reported this story, I became increasingly alarmed about job scam texts. If the labor market is worsening, meaning more people are going to fall for this stuff, shouldn't we be doing more to stop it? On the list of a million worries, I'd really rather not add "my niece got bamboozled out of $1,000 because of some click farm scam" to the list. It turns out that doing something about this is hard.
When I ask Kate Griffin, with the Aspen Institute's Financial Security Program, who's responsible for clamping down on scam texts, she tells me, "That's the problem." It's sort of everyone's job, which also means it's sort of no one's job.
"A lot of people have a component part of it," she says. "There's a part of the FBI that goes after this. There's a part of the Treasury Department that is focused on the anti-money-laundering part of it. The FTC, of course, holds their component of it, but there's not a single coordinating entity to say, 'What is our national approach to fighting this?'"
As far as how the private sector can combat this, it's complicated, too. Griffin explains that while telecommunications companies are the infrastructure layer, they don't necessarily have the ability to know what's inside messages. She notes that CTIA, a trade association that represents the wireless industry, has a " secure messaging initiative" whose goal is to put a stop to unwanted or illegal text messages.
Besides its app that lets consumers block unwanted communications from spammers and scammers, Quilici's YouMail also collects data to alert phone carriers of scams and bad actors. Still, it's hard for companies to get their arms around the problem — scammers are savvy, and the business incentives to crack down on them aren't particularly compelling.
"If you wanted to try to stop it, you'd have to make it really, really difficult for anybody to get a phone number," Quilici says.
Texting and calling cost next to nothing. Making communications more expensive would make scamming less lucrative, but it would also make basic functions pricier for everyone else. Companies (or the government) could implement know-your-customer laws, as banks have, so carriers have to know whom they're giving a number to, but that would be onerous, too.
"There's a big tension between their desire to sell services and quickly and stopping fraud," Quilici says. "I don't view the carriers as bad guys. I view them as having a business problem."
The unwillingness of the government and phone carriers to make a concerted effort against scam texts puts a lot of onus on individual consumers to try to protect themselves, which is not an easy task. A lot of these scams look realistic — ChatGPT makes it easier to write a scam, meaning the grammar mistakes that might have set off some spidey senses are less likely to appear. These scams don't just take place via text; they can also come in emails or even in social media messages on platforms such as LinkedIn, where contact from a recruiter would seem quite normal. And they often invoke big-name companies that people would like to work for, which may increase the likelihood that someone falls for a trick.
What's one to do in this scenario? First, scrutinize where the text came from. (Is it a weird email address or a foreign phone number? Though scammers can make those look plausible, too.) Next, do a deep reading of the message itself, checking whether the grammar is right and whether the offer seems too good to be true. A six-figure job for clicking boxes on an app sounds lovely, but it's also not a thing that exists. Mention of pay in crypto is a red flag, as are interviews via text. If the alleged employer asks you for money, that's a no-no. As a general rule, you shouldn't have to pay money to make money.
"Our advice is never click on links or respond to unexpected texts or WhatsApp messages or other messages about jobs. Real employers will never contact you that way," Daffan says. She asks people to report fraud to the FTC.
If you do think a job offer could be legitimate, see whether you can find the listing online — and make sure it's real and matches on details such as salary and location. People can also just contact the prospective employer directly to find out if it is a fake. And if you do get scammed out of money, contact your bank immediately and try to get the money back.
Ultimately, Quilici says, the best advice is to slow down. There's no need to respond to that job offer text right away. Larson echoes the point. "If they're trying to rush you, they're trying to hire you, and they ask to be paid for something, that's all red flags," she says. Anyone who's interviewed for a job lately knows that the process can drag on for a wildly long time.
Overall, the good news is that as time goes on and more people learn about scams, the more we collectively become inoculated to different tactics and hoaxes. People were highly susceptible to email scams when they first got email addresses. Now, you still hear about them, but they're a lot less common, and most people have an easier time spotting them.
In the meantime, the bad news is that a tougher labor market means we may not have time for this natural collective education to happen. When people are anxious about money and work, they're likelier to have blind spots that scammers know how to exploit. If you're on month five of the job search and worried about how you're going to pay rent, you'll probably reply to that text faster than you would under normal circumstances.
"One of the reasons that job scams are flourishing is that many people do want to work extra and make extra income, and they're looking for an opportunity to do that," Daffan says. "And scammers know that, and so they know there's a big market out there if they can have a convincing job scam. And, unfortunately, that is the case."

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Boston Globe
an hour ago
- Boston Globe
Keep your shoes on
Get The Gavel A weekly SCOTUS explainer newsletter by columnist Kimberly Atkins Stohr. Enter Email Sign Up Why the TSA waited five years after Reid's abortive shoe bombing to institute its shoes-off rule has never been clearly explained, but in all that time no one else has tried to take down a plane using explosive footwear. Nor have any passengers ever been caught with a shoe bomb in the nearly two decades after the rule went into effect. Advertisement In other words, there has never been any evidence that making millions of travelers shed their shoes contributed to anyone's safety. It was all things rather than bad people — with screening for forbidden bottles of shampoo or corkscrews or lighters as if they posed deadly threats, instead of monitoring for behavior that represents a real threat to planes and their passengers. Advertisement From the day it was created, the TSA has specialized in fighting the last war and in overreacting to one-time long shots. One Islamist radical tried to hide explosives in his shoes, so hundreds of millions of travelers had to start removing their shoes. Another would-be terrorist, Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, attempted to hide a bomb in his underwear, so we all had to submit to full-body scans or (for several years) pat-downs. British officials learned of a plot to I often reflected in the years after 9/11 that if Osama bin Laden's terrorists had destroyed not four airliners on that terrible day but four crowded movie theaters, then Americans would have had to radically change the way they went to the movies — advance reservations would have become mandatory, audiences would have had to get to the cineplex (with photo ID) two hours early, and X-ray equipment operated by a vast new federal bureaucracy, the Theater Security Administration, would have scanned everyone entering and leaving. But at airports there would be no interminable security lines, a box cutter in your carry-on wouldn't raise any eyebrows, and you could arrive for your flight 20 minutes before departure. We would still be as vulnerable to a hijacking-massacre as we actually were on 9/11 — but almost no one would be thinking about that because the 'last war' would have taken a different form. Advertisement Former TSA administrator And even that they aren't very good at. The government's own 'red team' tests — in which undercover inspectors try to smuggle weapons or contraband through security — have As Americans who travel abroad are aware, other countries never deemed it necessary to adopt the shoes-off rule. That includes countries in which the threat of terrorism is far more acute. In Israel, for example, security screening begins even before passengers enter the terminal, officials make a point of engaging in dialogue with almost everyone who's catching a plane, and travelers remain with their luggage until after the security check is completed. But nobody has to take their shoes off or remove their laptop from their bag to be scanned separately. Security agents there are watching for nervousness, inconsistencies, or suspicious behavior. They aren't preoccupied with confiscating bottled water or whether you're wearing a belt. Advertisement The TSA's ritualized absurdities have come at a steep cost. They waste billions of dollars annually. They consume countless hours of passengers' time. They treat everyone like a potential terrorist. To prove that no one is exempt, they have gone to the extreme of patting down Nearly a quarter-century after 9/11, there is no evidence that any of this has ever prevented a hijacking. 'TSA has played next to no role in the biggest counterterrorism stories of the past two decades,' journalist Darryl Campbell, who writes extensively about air travel and airline security, wrote in 2022. It is widely agreed that the two most effective deterrents to another hijacking have nothing to do with airport checkpoints. One was a physical change: the locking and reinforcing of cockpit doors, so that no terrorist could ever again breach the cockpit during flight. The other was psychological. The passengers on 9/11's United Flight 93, by overpowering the terrorists and forcing them to crash the plane into a field, prevented a far greater catastrophe that day — and thereby taught future travelers of the importance of fighting back. Advertisement The end of the shoes-off rule is long overdue. But it's just one small retreat in a long war of make-believe. The TSA remains fixated on creating the illusion of security rather than actually providing it. If the agency truly wants to protect travelers, it should abandon its theater of confiscated water bottles and trampled dignity and learn to focus instead on what truly keeps passengers safe. But until that happens, we can at least keep our shoes on. It's a start. Jeff Jacoby can be reached at

Miami Herald
5 hours ago
- Miami Herald
72-Month Car Loan Trap: Why Low Payments Cost You More
What does stretching a five-figure purchase into six-year installments say about our relationship with cars? Is it healthy? Great for finance companies, less our pockets. Have we allowed ourselves to be driven there? Here's how to take back control. I slid into the dealer's driver's seat, felt the leather hug my palms, then froze at "72 months." Whoa! The finance manager tapped the screen and winked: "Lower payment." I typed six years of obligation like signing a lease on a sculpture I'd never own outright. Americans now average 68.63-month new-car loan terms, financing vehicles almost like mortgages. Sticker shock meets budget limits. The average new-vehicle transaction price hit $48,641 in January. Buyers fixate on seat-of-the-pants monthly payments, then let lenders stretch terms until that number lands in their "comfort zone." Subprime shoppers chase 84-month deals; prime borrowers opt for 72 months. Captive finance arms splash incentives on 72-month deals like syrup on pancakes, while banks pocket profit on the back end. A slip from 6.85% to 6.73% APR year-over-year looks shiny, but tack on a dozen extra payments and watch your savings evaporate. Extending your loan term doesn't build equity - it delays it. Stretching to 72 months increases total interest paid by thousands. Once the warranty expires, repair bills hit like a pothole at highway speed. Negative equity becomes normal when your balance outpaces resale value. Mortgages build home equity; auto loans front-load interest and back-load payoff. You don't treat a car like real estate. A six-year debt run transforms ownership into an endurance contest, not a milestone. Opt for 60 months or less: Fewer payments, less your down payment: Reduces loan principal and negative equity credit unions and banks: Compare APRs on 48- to 60-month total-interest disclosures: Demand clarity on what you'll pay over the life of the loan. You'll be shocked by the differences. That engine growl under your hood isn't just horsepower - it's the sound of a 72-month clock winding down. You pay for control. Don't let your loan own you. Focus on ownership, not just monthly relief. Drivers deserve options that reward true purchase, not prolong debt. Copyright 2025 The Arena Group, Inc. All Rights Reserved.


Indianapolis Star
6 hours ago
- Indianapolis Star
Republicans stooped to Democrats' level using Trump's tax bill to buy votes
Now that President Donald Trump's One Big Beautiful Bill Act has been signed into law, we can get into analyzing what is actually in the legislation. There are a few things that are clear to me as a conservative who hoped Republicans would push sound fiscal policies. Primarily, this is a flawed conservative policy. While it is a good thing that the 2017 Trump tax cuts were extended, there remain a ton of problems with the bill. Many of the tax break provisions have less to do with economics and more to do with pandering to the American people. Congressional Republicans seemingly made little attempt to justify their poor fiscal ideas, choosing instead to pass Trump's agenda by any means necessary. More: Data centers are inevitable, but why should Indiana pay for their energy demand? | Opinion However, the law goes further, creating new tax exemptions for Social Security, tips and overtime pay. These policies, in addition to the poor policy of an increased cap on state and local taxes, are little more than bribes to the American people. Opinion: Trump's tax bill will crush the rural voters who chose him I'm all for new tax cuts, provided we are reducing spending at the same time. But there is no economic rationale for exempting any of these forms of income from taxation. These incomes are not unique in their impact on the economy and should not be treated as such. The only reason for not taxing tips or overtime in favor of other forms of income is that MAGA lawmakers think they can buy votes. It's a tactic often employed by congressional Democrats, who promise either student loan forgiveness or taxing the ultrawealthy in order to buy middle-class and youth votes. Conservatives should not be proud of our leaders for stooping so low. Not only are these cuts not coherent in theory, they aren't even fiscally sound conservative policies. The issue with this law is that it overlooks the increasingly massive deficit that will be incurred to fund it, as well as the aforementioned new tax breaks. While it attempts to bridge this gap with good policies, such as work requirements for Medicaid and food stamp benefits, it isn't enough. Even after accounting for the economic growth the tax cuts are anticipated to generate, the bill is estimated to add $3.8 trillion to the deficit over the next decade. Tax cuts paid for through deficit spending aren't really tax cuts. The cuts still need to be paid for, and both options for doing so would be an additional burden on the American people. The first option is through borrowing money, which not only further increases the national debt but also increases the revenue required later to repay that debt. Second, this is achieved through printing more money, which is inflationary and places further costs on Americans. There is no magic third way that allows the government to cut taxes and keep spending without, at some point, hurting Americans. The only way to truly create tax cuts is by commensurately cutting spending at the same time. However, responsible budgets are not the goal of the current GOP. The main goal is to deliver on Trump's populist attempts to bribe voters, even if, ultimately, this will hurt those voters.