Retailers have steadily expanded store-based return options to win convenience-driven shoppers, but the shift is exposing structural weaknesses in how return data is captured, shared, and governed across channels. New research from Appriss Retail shows how fragmented systems are creating more opportunities for both coordinated fraud and customer “gray-zone” behavior.
In-Store Options Expand but Control Systems Haven’t Caught Up
Appriss Retail’s survey of more than 1,000 consumers highlights how sharply return traffic has tilted back toward stores. In 2025, 52% of purchases were bought and returned in-store, while 29% originated online but were taken back to stores. Only 19% of returns were processed fully online. That shift gives retailers more touch points with customers, yet it also concentrates exposure. According to the findings, 79% of all fraudulent returns happened in stores, highlighting how offenders exploit channel gaps when return histories are not fully integrated across platforms.
The disconnect is not new, but it is widening. Many retailers still operate legacy store systems that do not communicate return-blocking rules or behavioral flags generated online. As Appriss notes, “A customer blocked for suspicious activity online can return the same item in-store with no warning.” Industry analysts have similarly pointed out, including in NRF loss prevention briefings, that organized retail crime groups increasingly test return policies across channels to find inconsistencies. That dynamic is now accelerating as more retailers promote free and fast in-store returns to compete with marketplaces.
Lenient Policies Encourage Boundary-Pushing Behavior
The report also surfaces a softer but commercially important pattern: the rise of customers who know they are stretching the rules but do so anyway. Sixty-three percent of respondents said they were comfortable returning items without tags, 61% were fine returning items after home trial, and 40% saw little issue with returning items worn for an occasion. These behaviors are not typically malicious, but they blur the line between acceptable use and hidden cost.
Frequent returners often view their behavior as within policy, even when it strains store operations and increases handling costs. Retailers facing cost pressure, particularly as reverse logistics expenses rise faster than outbound logistics, according to trade reports, are looking for ways to differentiate between legitimate patterns and escalating abuse without alienating customers. Appriss Retail recommends a “warn and approve” protocol that gives customers visibility into their own return behavior before escalation. The survey found that 90% of customers would still shop with a brand after receiving a warning, reinforcing the case for earlier, more transparent intervention rather than sudden rejection at the counter.
What Comes Next for Returns Intelligence
One emerging signal worth watching is how retailers are beginning to treat return data not as an afterthought to fraud control but as a source of margin insight. As reverse logistics costs rise across apparel, electronics, and home goods, a trend well-documented in recent trade reports, several large chains are evaluating how return patterns correlate with assortment decisions, promotional design, and SKU profit erosion. That shift reframes returns from a cost center to a diagnostic tool, giving retailers leverage to tune product mixes and reduce waste long before an item ever comes back to the counter.
