SAP Concur warns of travel expense compliance risks

SAP Concur has published research on compliance risks in corporate travel and expenses, identifying policy friction and unapproved AI use as key issues for finance leaders.

The survey found that half of business travellers globally admit they have bent their company's travel and expense rules at least once during their working lives. It also found that 50% believed policies were flexible enough to justify most expenses, while 15% said internal approval processes were too weak to detect breaches.

In Australia and New Zealand, respondents were 8.7 percentage points more likely than the global average to identify situations where they might bend travel and expense policies. The figures suggest the issue is not limited to isolated misconduct, but is also linked to how companies write rules and structure claims processes.

Jonathan Beeby, Managing Director, SAP Concur Australia and New Zealand, said: "When policies leave room for interpretation, employees naturally make their own judgement calls. Finance leaders shouldn't rely on employees to decide where the boundaries sit. Clear policies supported by intelligent workflows create more consistent behaviour and reduce unnecessary compliance risk."

The research also highlighted a separate problem for finance teams: employees choosing not to file legitimate claims. Globally, one in four business travellers said they had deliberately avoided submitting a valid expense to avoid unwanted attention.

Some said they were concerned about appearing to spend more than colleagues. Others feared being seen as high spenders or assumed a claim would be rejected. In Australia and New Zealand, respondents were 11.6 percentage points more likely than the global average to give reasons for avoiding legitimate expense claims.

Expense anxiety

That pattern creates gaps in company spending data. When legitimate costs go unclaimed, finance teams have a less complete picture of actual expenditure, weakening forecasting and reducing confidence in internal financial reporting.

The findings add to a wider debate among finance leaders about balancing oversight with ease of use in business travel systems. Companies often respond to compliance concerns by tightening policies, increasing audits and adding approval steps, but the research argues that these measures do not address every source of risk.

Another pressure point is the growing use of consumer AI tools for work-related travel tasks. In Australia and New Zealand, 77% of business travellers said they have used, or would use, AI tools outside their employer's approved technology environment to support business travel, 6.5 percentage points above the global average.

Respondents gave practical reasons for that behaviour. Forty-two per cent said they preferred different AI tools, while 30% said their employer did not provide AI functions for travel planning or booking.

AI oversight

For finance teams, the concern is that employees may enter travel or financial information into consumer applications outside company oversight. That can create governance issues even as firms try to improve efficiency in booking, reporting and reimbursement.

Beeby said: "Employees increasingly expect AI to remove repetitive administrative work. If organisations don't provide approved tools that meet those expectations, many employees will naturally look elsewhere."

Finance leaders need to make compliant behaviour easier within everyday workflows rather than relying only on enforcement after the event. SAP Concur pointed to automated receipt capture, real-time policy checks, AI-assisted expense categorisation and pre-submission validation as ways to reduce errors before claims reach finance teams.

Such tools can also change the tone of compliance by giving staff guidance at the point of booking or filing an expense, instead of flagging issues only during an audit or approval review. That approach aims to reduce both rule-bending and reluctance to submit valid claims.

The research suggests finance departments face two linked risks: spending that falls outside policy and spending that never appears in the data at all. Both can distort a company's view of travel costs, especially as business travel volumes increase and employees adopt new tools faster than policy frameworks adapt.

For employers in Australia and New Zealand, the survey indicates these pressures may be more pronounced than in other markets, given the higher share of respondents willing to bend policy, avoid claims or use AI tools outside approved systems.

As Beeby put it: "The answer isn't banning AI. It's providing secure, integrated AI capabilities that improve the employee experience while maintaining governance."