SAP Concur Canada flags grey areas in travel claims

SAP Concur Canada has outlined five common grey areas in business travel and expense claims for Canadian companies, focusing on areas where reimbursement policies often leave room for inconsistent decisions.

The recommendations come from Brian Veloso, Managing Director at SAP Concur Canada, in an article on how employers can handle claims involving food delivery, airport lounge access, tipping, premium seating and alcohol at business meals.

The article argues that unclear rules and fragmented approval processes make it harder for finance teams and travel managers to assess claims consistently. It says static policy documents and decentralised workflows can lead to disputes, slower reimbursement and weaker oversight of travel spending.

The issue comes as Canadian finance leaders continue to scrutinise the value of business travel. According to SAP Concur's 8th Annual Global Business Travel Survey, 89% of Chief Financial Officers said travel managers need to do a better job of demonstrating its value, while 82% expect travel budgets to increase in 2026.

Five grey areas

On food delivery, the article describes a scenario in which an employee orders dinner through an app and delivery charges push the bill above a company threshold. Employers should weigh the total cost against the per diem, the availability of alternatives and how often the employee submits delivery charges.

For airport lounge access, the guidance points to long layovers and the need for a quiet place to work as factors that can justify a claim. Companies should also check whether access is already available through corporate cards before approving reimbursement.

Tipping is presented as another source of compliance friction because receipts are often unavailable. Companies should consider local customs, the business context, the amount tipped and the employee's explanation, while setting percentage caps or thresholds for unreceipted gratuities.

Premium seat classes are identified as a frequent point of uncertainty, especially when requests come from employees who do not usually qualify for upgraded travel. Decisions should take account of flight duration, the purpose of the trip, health or accessibility needs and the gap in fare prices.

On alcohol at business meals, employers need to assess whether spending is proportionate and whether sector rules or other compliance restrictions apply. The guidance also notes that the Canada Revenue Agency generally limits the deductible portion of meals, beverages and entertainment expenses to 50%, subject to exceptions.

Policy and systems

The article says companies do not need a rule for every possible expense. Instead, it argues for clear, flexible guardrails supported by systems that can capture extra context and apply checks automatically.

Examples include requiring employees to provide details such as recipient, purpose and amount for gratuities, and using receipt parsing to separate alcohol spending from the rest of a meal bill. For food delivery, it recommends allowing staff to add context at the point of claim when delivery is the most practical option.

Veloso said businesses should build frameworks that let employees make decisions while giving finance teams enough information to review exceptions in a standard way. This is becoming more important as workers expect digital tools to simplify travel and expense administration, the article adds.

The survey cited in the article found that 38% of Canadian business travellers want artificial intelligence embedded in calendars and email. It also found that 70% would use non-approved artificial intelligence tools, underlining the need for approved systems that support travel and expense decisions within company rules.

On traveller sentiment, the same survey found that 70% of Canadian business travellers are hesitant to take a business trip this year. That may force employers to think more carefully about when flexibility and traveller support should influence decisions on longer or more demanding itineraries.

"The opportunity is to make those decisions more consistent without making policies more restrictive: clear expectations for employees, better context for managers and stronger visibility for finance teams can help turn expense 'grey areas' into manageable, well-governed exceptions," said Veloso.