Work from anywhere arrangements are exposing Australian employers to visa, tax and payroll obligations HR teams often miss
Employers are treating business travel as routine administration when a single overseas trip can trigger visa breaches, foreign tax liabilities and offshore employment obligations, according to employment law and global mobility advisers.
The warning comes as hybrid and “work from anywhere” arrangements stretch what was once a short conference trip into weeks of offshore work on payroll. Global mobility adviser Vialto says many organisations still lack visibility over where their people are physically working and for how long.
Nicholas Potter, employment practice leader at LegalVision, said the requests landing on his desk have changed markedly.
“The questions have moved from occasional business travel to ongoing cross-border work. Employers are no longer just asking whether an employee can attend an overseas conference. They are asking whether someone can work from Bali, London, or Singapore for 6 weeks, continue accessing Australian systems, service Australian clients, and remain on the Australian payroll,” he said.
That shift brings a different risk profile, Potter said, spanning immigration permissions, local employment laws, tax, superannuation, workplace health and safety, insurance, and data security.
“The practical shift is that ‘work from anywhere’ now needs governance, not just manager discretion.”
Employers have long grappled with the rights and responsibilities of hiring remote staff overseas, but the growth of temporary offshore work has blurred the line between travel and relocation.
Why short business trips still carry compliance risk
Potter said the most common misconception among HR teams is that brevity equals safety.
“The biggest gap is assuming that a short stay means low legal risk. A country may allow meetings, conferences or training under a visitor entry pathway, but not productive work, local service delivery or paid activity. The rules are country-specific, and the line between business-visitor activity and work is not always clear,” he said.
“Employers also sometimes assume Australian obligations pause because the employee is physically overseas. They do not. An Australian-based employee may still have Australian workplace entitlements, while local laws in the host country may also be relevant. HR teams should treat overseas work as a separate approval category, not ordinary remote work.”
Hugh Cook, partner at Vialto, said the consequences can surface before an employee leaves the airport. He pointed to a scenario in which a project manager flies from Sydney to India to lead a client workshop.
“On arrival, they discover their visa does not permit the planned activities. They are denied entry, questioned about earlier trips and ultimately deported. A seemingly minor oversight exposes a broader company-wide compliance gap – creating potential penalties, sponsorship consequences and reputational damage with the client and local authorities. A routine business trip has become a costly compliance incident.”
The 60-day threshold catching frequent travellers
Tax exposure can build quietly across several short trips. Cook noted that Australia has no income tax treaty with Hong Kong, so the familiar 183-day treaty exemption does not apply to Australian employees working alongside a Hong Kong branch.
Instead, a visitor may be exempt from Hong Kong salaries tax only if their physical presence does not exceed 60 days in the year of assessment – and part of a day counts as a full day. Once that threshold is crossed, income linked to Hong Kong duties may become taxable, and reporting obligations can arise for both employer and employee.
“Without central travel tracking, several short trips can quietly push an employee over the limit,” Cook said.
The risk extends to the organisation itself. Vialto warns that senior employees who regularly negotiate contracts, generate revenue or make decisions offshore could create a “permanent establishment” – a taxable business presence for the company in that country.
What should a business travel policy include?
Potter said the starting point is a single, non-negotiable rule.
“The key guardrail is simple: no overseas work without approval before travel. That approval should check the country, length of stay, visa position, work activities, data access, insurance, tax, safety and whether local employment laws may be triggered,” he said.
He recommended contracts and policies identify permitted countries, set maximum overseas work periods, reserve the right to revoke approval, and address equipment, confidential information, local public holidays and time zones.
With flexibility now among the top benefits offered by Australian employers, HR teams handling offshore work requests should also be across the Fair Work Act rules for responding to flexible working requests.
Cook said leading organisations pair a clear framework with centralised travel tracking drawn from corporate booking systems, focusing on their highest-volume and highest-risk travel corridors.
“The goal is not to restrict business travel, but to enable it. With the right framework in place, organisations can support international growth and client service while reducing the risk of unexpected immigration breaches, tax exposures and costly compliance failures,” he said.
For Potter, the failure point is cultural as much as legal.
“Organisations get the balance wrong when they treat overseas work as a lifestyle benefit rather than a regulated work arrangement. A flexible policy can still support travel, but it should draw a hard line between tourism with incidental contact, business visitor activity and actual offshore work. The goal is not to stop mobility. It is to ensure the business knows when flexibility becomes a legal risk.”
