Why regional cost volatility still defines the business of driving and what organizations must prepare for next
As 2025 winds down, fuel prices remain one of the most closely watched and most misunderstood inputs shaping the business of driving. While headlines often focus on national averages or short-term fluctuations at the pump, organizations with mobile workforces experience fuel costs very differently. For them, gas prices are not a consumer inconvenience; they are a structural variable that influences reimbursement fairness, budget predictability, and the day-to-day experience of employees who rely on their personal vehicles to get work done. Looking ahead to 2026, understanding what really happened with fuel costs in 2025 and how those costs varied by region and driving patterns is essential to making smarter decisions about how driving is managed, supported, and reimbursed.
Motus data helps clarify this picture. When we analyze how much fuel costs changed and how many business miles were driven in each region, the implications for fairness, budgeting, and workforce planning in 2026 become unavoidable.
2025 Was a Year of Stabilization, Not Certainty
At first glance, 2025 appeared to bring a welcome relief at the gas pump. Average fuel prices declined across every major U.S. region:
- South: −7.16%
- Northeast: −6.82%
- Midwest: −5.93%
- West: −2.6%
Compared to the sharp swings that organizations faced just a few years ago, this moderation felt like a return to normal.
But, stability should not be confused with predictability.
While prices softened overall, they did so unevenly, preserving (in some cases, reinforcing) the structural cost differences that shape how employees who drive for work experience their jobs. The West remained the most expensive region to fuel a vehicle, despite posting the smallest year-over-year decline. The South and Midwest saw larger percentage drops, yet those gains were offset by significantly higher mileage volumes and longer driving distances. In the Northeast, elevated fuel costs continued to collide with dense urban driving conditions that amplify wear, idling, and inefficiency.
In other words, 2025 did not eliminate fuel-driven pressure on the mobile workforce; it redistributed it.
For employers, this distinction matters. National averages tell a comforting story, but they obscure the localized realities that determine whether reimbursement programs feel fair, accurate, and sustainable. As organizations look toward 2025, the lesson from 2025 is clear: even in a year of relative calm regarding gas prices, fuel economics remain highly dependent on geography and increasingly misaligned with one-size-fits-all approaches to managing the cost of driving.
Mileage Patterns Expose the Hidden Impact of Fuel Volatility
Fuel costs alone never tell the full story. The real cost pressure emerges when we look at how much driving actually occurs in each region.
Motus 2025 mileage data shows:
Average Monthly Mileage by Region:
- South: 120,205,394
- Midwest: 65,566,464
- West: 50,712,792
- Northeast: 37,577,274
Why this matters
Even though the South saw the largest fuel-price drop (−7.16%), it is also the region where employees drove the most miles. That means:
- Southern drivers still bore the highest total fuel burden because of volume.
- Western drivers faced the steepest per-mile burden due to higher fuel costs.
- Northeastern drivers dealt with high prices and dense urban driving conditions.
- Midwestern drivers balanced lower fuel costs with long-distance routing.
The cost equation is not “fuel price only”; it is fuel price × miles driven, and 2025 data shows this multiplier varies dramatically by region.
The Geography Gap Widens When Fuel Costs and Mileage Are Combined
Pairing the two datasets reveals a structural inequality at the heart of many vehicle programs.
| Region | 2025 Fuel Price Change | 2025 Miles Driven | Implication |
| South | Largest decline (−7.16%) | Highest volume (1.376B miles) | Even small price movements create massive cost swings |
| West | Smallest decline (−2.6%) | High mileage (581M miles) | Drivers still pay significantly more per mile |
| Northeast | −6.82% | 430M miles | Urban stop-and-go driving magnifies wear-and-tear costs |
| Midwest | −5.93% | 752M miles | Lowest fuel costs but long-distance routes drive higher consumption |
When organizations use flat-rate reimbursement models, this geography gap translates directly into:
- Underpayment in the West and Northeast
- Overpayment in low-cost, high-distance Midwestern markets
- Fairness issues for Southern drivers whose volume multiplies their total expenses
- Budget unpredictability as geography shapes true program cost
Motus Benchmark data reinforces this, showing that companies using region-specific reimbursement models, such as Fixed and Variable Rate (FAVR), see 32% higher employee satisfaction.
What 2025 Signals About the 2026 Outlook
Volatility will continue to matter more than averages
Even if national fuel averages remain steady, localized effects, such as tax changes, seasonal refinery cycles, supply chain adjustments, will maintain regional divergence.
Rising non-fuel operating costs will intensify the geography gap
Insurance and maintenance costs continue trending upward across industries, amplifying every regional difference.
IRS scrutiny will increase the need for compliant, data-driven documentation
Organizations relying on manual logs or outdated monthly allowances face increasing audit risk.
The mobile workforce expects reimbursement that reflects real-world conditions
Motus research shows that employees increasingly view fairness and transparency as central to program satisfaction.
Preparing for 2026: A Strategic Path Forward
Move from national averages to regionally indexed reimbursement
Fuel and mileage data both show that a one-size-fits-all rate is mathematically misaligned with reality.
Adopt technology that automates mileage, eliminates manual burden, and ensures compliance
Motus platform users save an average of 21+ hours annually because they have automated mileage capture.
Treat the business of driving as a strategic system
Driving employees spend an average of 13 hours per week working from their vehicles, or 33% of their workweek, making reimbursement accuracy an operational imperative.
Budget for regional variation, not national trends
Fuel-price declines in 2025 do not imply 2026 stability, especially for the high-mileage South and high-cost West.
Final Thoughts: 2025’s fuel and mileage data point to the same truth
Even in a year of broad declines in fuel prices, the economics of the mobile workforce remain defined by regional divergence, structural volatility, and unequal cost burdens on employees who drive for work.
The organizations that succeed in 2026 will be those that:
- recognize these disparities,
- modernize their reimbursement strategies,
- adopt data-powered technology,
- and build programs aligned to how and where their employees actually drive.
Want to learn how your company can be prepared for the year ahead? Reach out to a Motus advisor today.
