Mahou USA is a portfolio of beverage brands including Founders Brewing Craft Beer, Avery Brewing Craft Beer, and Mahou Imports.
As Chief Sales Officer, Steve Wheeler oversees a field sales team of about 110 people across the United States. With a distributed team driving every day, personal vehicle reimbursement is not a minor policy. It affects compensation, fairness, compliance, and financial oversight.
Like many companies, Mahou USA began with a straightforward approach. Over time, that simplicity raised more meaningful financial questions.
Results At a Glance
- $500K+ allowance spend revealed hidden inefficiencies, including ~$250K in estimated allowance waste.
- Taxable structure increased costs for everyone, both Mahou and employees were overpaying.
- Flat allowances created uneven outcomes, drivers were not reimbursed equally based on real usage.
- Industry shift prompted a strategic rethink, peer companies moving to FAVR signaled a better path.
- Structured RFP validated the decision, economics and support made Cardata the right fit.
- Transition required ~30 days of adjustment, then became part of normal operations.
- Employees stayed whole, with lower taxes, most drivers ended up equal or better financially.
- Program is now easier to stand behind internally, it is more aligned, defensible, and efficient.
The Challenge: A Flat Car Allowance
Before working with Cardata, Mahou USA operated on a flat allowance model.
Steve explains:
"Before our journey with Cardata, we were on a flat fee where we provided a car allowance to our drivers and allowed them to reimburse gas."
As Mahou took a closer look at their program, the financial impact became clearer.
With 105 drivers, the company was spending approximately $528,000 annually on car allowances, alongside $239,881 in annual fuel spend.
This also revealed an estimated $252,104 in allowance waste, along with $35,982 in personal fuel overspend by employees.
Flat allowances are common because they are simple to administer and easy to understand.
However, simplicity can create tradeoffs, particularly when it comes to tax treatment and fairness across different geographies and mileage levels.
The Real Issue: Tax Liability
The challenge was not the administrative burden. It was tax exposure.
Both the company and employees were paying more in taxes than necessary. For finance and sales leaders, that is a practical concern.
If a mileage reimbursement structure increases taxable income without a clear reason, it becomes harder to defend in budget reviews or internal discussions. It also means employees are not taking home the full amount the program was intended to provide.
"The biggest challenges were, from [both] an individual and from a company standpoint, tax liability. We were essentially paying a lot of money to the federal government, which we already do and we don't want to do any more of, right? And not only us as a company, but our employees were overpaying with their tax dollars."
Given the size of the program, with over half a million dollars in annual allowance spend, even small inefficiencies in tax treatment had a meaningful financial impact.
The Moment of Clarity: Watching the Industry Shift
The decision to explore alternatives was strategic rather than reactive. Mahou USA observed that peer organizations were migrating to tax-free alternatives.
"We took a look at what was going on in the industry and how many companies of similar size and scale were still using a car allowance, and [we saw that] even the largest beer companies in the world are migrating over to a Fixed and Variable Rate (FAVR) program."
Steve continues, “What better time for us to adopt and move in that direction?"
That made the tradeoffs clearer. Flat allowances are simple, but FAVR programs offer a more structured and tax-efficient approach.
At that point, the question became whether it was responsible to maintain the current program without exploring a more structured alternative.
A Structured Evaluation Process
Mahou USA approached the decision methodically.
They ran a formal RFP process and evaluated multiple providers. Cardata was selected because the economics made sense and the level of customer service set it apart.
For Sales, HR, and Finance leaders, that combination matters. The program must make financial sense, and the support must be dependable. Change is easier to manage when there is confidence in the partner guiding the implementation.
"Cardata was the best fit for us, and it's worked out tremendously."
Managing the Change for Employee Drivers
Any change to reimbursement affects employees directly. That requires thoughtful communication and structured rollout.
Employee uncertainty is natural. Employees want to understand how a new structure will affect their take-home pay.
The first month focused on clarity and support.
"It was a very solid transition. Obviously when we first adopted the FAVR program it was a big change for a lot of people and change can be a little bit scary. So, the first 30 days were a lot of learning, a lot of engagement with the Cardata support team who were able to quell a lot of those fears that our team had about this new program."
That engagement helped reduce friction early.
Over time, the program became part of normal operations.
"After we got through the first month, everybody got familiar with the app, how it works, how it impacts their take-home. They've become a lot more comfortable with it and they use it seamlessly on a daily basis."
The Results: Financially Whole, With Lower Tax Liability
Now, a year after implementation, the results were steady and measurable.
"What we've found is [that] most of our employees, from a dollar standpoint, are either in the same place as they were before or slightly better with a much lower tax liability."
Employees were financially whole or slightly ahead compared to the previous structure, while tax liability was lower.
The program delivered 37% in overall tax savings, split between the employer and employees to ensure fairness and buy-in.
That balance is important. It demonstrates fairness to employees while also improving financial responsibility.
The shift also addressed areas of waste identified earlier in the program, including allowance inefficiencies and misalignment between fuel spend and reimbursement.
Culturally, the program has settled in.
"Our folks don't talk about the FAVR program a ton. Occasionally at the end of the year when it comes down to taking a look at tax savings, we hear very positive reviews from our employees."
Advice for Companies Still Running Flat Allowances
Steve’s recommendation is practical and measured:
"It's in your company's best interest, and your employees best interest, to explore a FAVR program. The folks at Cardata are great.” He continues, “they're wonderful to work with. They have excellent customer service and they can definitely point you in the right direction and help you explore your options."
It is not about dramatic change. It is about reviewing the structure, understanding the tradeoffs, and choosing an approach that is fair, compliant, and defensible.
A Responsible Step Forward
Mahou USA did not change reimbursement programs because their previous system failed. They changed because they saw avoidable tax exposure, recognized an industry shift, and evaluated their options carefully.
They selected a partner they trusted. They guided their team through the transition. Employees remained financially whole. Tax liability decreased. The program became easier to stand behind internally.
That is what levelling up a car allowance looks like in practice.
Clear. Structured. Fair.
