87% of Finance Professionals Have Ignored Fraudulent Expenses, Reimbursements, or Claims, Medius' New Financial Census Reveals
New global study from Medius finds growing tolerance for 'shallowfakes' as finance teams invest heavily in AI and automation, even as fraud, operational efficiency, governance, and workforce wellbeing remain persistent challenges.
JACKSONVILLE, Fla., Aug. 25, 2026 /PRNewswire/ -- Medius, a leading provider of AP automation and spend management solutions, today released findings from its 2026 Financial Census, research from 2,386 finance executives across the US, UK, Sweden, and France. The headline findings reveal that workplace fraud is becoming normalized within finance departments despite heightened concerns about AI-generated scams.
The rise of the 'shallowfake'
Eighty-seven percent of finance executives have ignored a small expense, reimbursement, or claim they believed was fraudulent. Meanwhile, 67% said they would be likely to engage in a minor dishonest expense claim themselves if the behavior were common among coworkers, fueling the rise of 'shallowfakes' – low-value financial rule-bending, such as expense embellishment, adding up to significant business losses over time.
Nearly three-quarters (74%) of finance professionals believe small forms of fraud resulting in minor financial losses are already common in workplaces, while 64% said they would feel justified in committing a small dishonest financial act if they felt underpaid or undervalued. More than half (57%) admitted they would round up an expense or mileage claim if they believed it would go unnoticed.
At the same time, concern over AI-driven fraud is accelerating. Ninety-three percent of respondents said they are concerned about AI-generated fraud over the next 12 months. US organizations reported average yearly losses of $168,000 due to invoice fraud, with respondents seeing an average of one successful invoice fraud attempt per month.
"Costly deepfake fraud gets all the headlines," said Chris Wilmot, Chief Financial Officer at Medius. "But while finance professionals keep a sharp eye out for these scams, hundreds of thousands of dollars are slipping out the back door through shallowfake fraud. These seemingly minor 'micro frauds' add up to death by a thousand cuts for organizations without the controls in place to catch them."
Automation is here, so why are payments still late?
Despite 85% of finance teams reporting some level of accounts payable automation, nearly half of invoices still require manual intervention. Organizations estimate that 28% of invoices are paid late in a typical month, while 96% say managing late payments has contributed to stress or burnout among AP teams.
The impact of late payments extends well beyond finance teams. Nearly half (45%) of respondents said suppliers have imposed stricter upfront payment terms in response to late payments, while 43% reported suppliers ending relationships altogether. More than four in ten also said suppliers had reduced service quality or speed (42%) or escalated disputes to formal legal action (42%), highlighting the growing commercial consequences of delayed payments.
Kevin Permenter, Research Director - Financial Applications at IDC, comments: "Automation was supposed to make late payments the exception, not the norm. Yet the findings suggest many organizations continue to experience payment delays despite ongoing technology investment. As supplier terms tighten and business disruptions grow, the challenge is no longer simply adopting automation, but ensuring those investments deliver measurable operational outcomes."
Finance teams are embracing AI – but they don't trust it
AI adoption continues to accelerate across finance departments. Thirty-eight percent of finance executives already have agentic AI operating within at least some finance processes, while a further 50% plan to deploy agentic AI within the next 12 months. Despite this, trust remains a significant hurdle.
Ninety percent of finance professionals said there is always a financial or compliance threshold requiring human approval, regardless of AI accuracy or track record. At the same time, accountability for AI decision-making remains unclear. When asked who would be responsible if an AI error caused financial loss or a compliance issue, respondents were nearly evenly split between IT leaders, finance leaders, and the employees acting on AI recommendations. 45% of finance leaders said their teams often act on AI-generated recommendations without human intervention, highlighting the tension between growing reliance on AI and uncertainty around governance.
"Organizations are growing comfortable allowing AI to influence decisions, yet many still lack clear ownership when those decisions go wrong," Ahmed Fessi, Chief Transformation & Information Officer at Medius, said. "As autonomous finance becomes more common, explainability, governance, and accountability are just as important as accuracy."
AI is reshaping who is hired, promoted and paid
The research also found that AI is increasingly influencing hiring and performance management decisions, shaping the next generation of finance professionals. More than half (55%) of finance leaders said AI fluency has become a meaningful differentiator in recruitment, while 86% said employees' use of AI is now a factor in performance evaluations.
Despite AI's promises to relieve workers of menial tasks and make processes more efficient, AI is placing new pressures on finance teams. Three-quarters (75%) of respondents said AI usage has increased worker fatigue or burnout, underscoring the challenges organizations face as they adapt to rapidly changing expectations around technology, productivity, and skills development.
The full 2026 Financial Census report is available on the Medius website HERE.
Contact
For more information, please contact: Dan Bird at Fight or Flight, [email protected] / [email protected] +44 7885 670798
This information was brought to you by Cision http://news.cision.com.
SOURCE Medius
Share this article