Free online returns have long been a customer expectation, but tariffs and rising costs on everything from raw materials to shipping are forcing brands to rethink that model. Return fraud has also become more common, putting pressure on brands’ margins. Still, the strategy comes with the risk of deterring online shoppers who have grown to expect free shipping.
The NRF report found 57% of shoppers will walk away from a retailer after being charged for a return — a sharp increase from 40% last year. Yet the same report highlights a growing reality: Returns will cost the retail industry an estimated $849.9 billion in 2025, with online return rates reaching 19.3%.
Good.
It really started as free exchanges for when gifts were bought in the wrong size.
It was never meant to be buy whatever you want and we’ll ignore that you used it, broke it, or want it but “free”.
It hasn’t resembled the original intent for a long time. The customer isn’t right when they are “stealing”.
A lot of the companies featured in the story sell things like " adaptive clothing for seniors and people with disabilities," and “adaptive undergarments” so, it probably DEPENDS on what they are selling…
Until online retailers crack down on return fraud with more strict rules, buyers will continue to take full advantage and commit theft. As a consumer, of course I appreciate free returns, but as a seller the abuse I see is sickening. Retailers (online or brick and mortar) should limit the number of returns that any buyer can make in a 6-month or 1-year period. That restriction alone would go a long way in curbing the problem. I also think a no-return policy or very limited return policy would go a long way in making buyers consider their purchases more carefully (or stop them from stealing). Perhaps allow returns only for items over a certain dollar amount, depending on the type of item being sold.
This could easily be resolved with rebate/rewards/loyalty program. If you have X% or below of a return rate, you get Y% off your purchases.
We have a wholesaler who does this and they put the buyers return percentage in big bold letters on the order page. Once you hit a certain percentage, you loose any volume bonus for that month/quarter, if it gets egregious they automatically switch you to COD.
We had a large order their warehouse screwed up accounting for %70+ of our quarterly purchases, and when it had to go back… WHAM automatically went to COD until they updated the system.
Some large retailers like Staples employ an outside service to evaluate customers who return merchandise and will refuse returns from buyers who exceed whatever parameters the service sets.
This has been going on from before the e-commerce became such a large part of the business. Return fraud has always been significant.
Some buyers engage in return arbitrage, buying product which is cheaper from another source and returning to a higher priced retailer. Some manufacturers provide retailer specific UPC’s to help prevent this behavior. Avery Labels is an example of a company which provides the identical products to Office Depot and Staples with different UPSs.
I don’t attach a lot of importance to the feelings of the retailers who were interviewed. When your entire business model is in jeopardy, every problem and injustice grows in importance. And your emotions can overwhelm your intellect in such situations.
This past year I have had 38 returns. (2025 jan-oct_)
1 actual defective item
4 user errors stating the “item was defective” (includes details of “wrong size” etc)
24 False claims of item being defective for a free refund (no comments or just say defective)
4 website description inaccurate because buyer didn’t read it
5 honest “no longer needed” or “doesn’t fit my needs” returns.
Amazon actually does this. They just don’t advertise it. I know someone who bought books and returned them within the return window. She used Amazon like a library. At some point, Amazon cut her off and she was no longer allowed to return anything. She was very upset, because she did not believe she was breaking any rules.
Sadly (for sellers) she probably wasn’t since Amazon doesn’t spell out anything.
They want to be ‘flexible’ so they can do whatever they want. HER problem was probably actually buying from AMAZON! I would bet that she could have continued for years if the orders were with third party sellers!
Well, I’m pretty sure many of them were 3rd-party sellers. Most people say they are buying from Amazon when they purchase from the Amazon site. They don’t distinguish between Amazon and 3rd-party sellers.
