Lawmakers Continue Push for 'Combatting Retail Crime Act'
Q&A: Organized Retail Crime Costs Families $500 Annually

With U.S. Senator Chuck Grassley

Q: How does organized retail crime impact Main Street businesses and customers?

A: Organized crime syndicates are rampaging retail stores and cargo fleets across the country through sophisticated criminal schemes. It’s costing businesses and consumers billions of dollars a year. We’re not talking about a kid stealing a candy bar or pack of gum near the checkout counter. These schemes include cybercrime, fraud and other complex cons that have surged in recent years, with the average loss per cargo theft incident exceeding $200,000. Transnational criminal organizations target U.S. shippers, retailers and the supply chain with aggressive tactics overwhelming local law enforcement. Cargo theft costs the supply chain up to $35 billion each year, contributing to higher consumer prices and driving up insurance costs.

At the hearing I brought up recent efforts by the U.S. Department of Justice that indicted 11 defendants, including nine illegal immigrants, with stealing nearly a half-million dollars of Nike shoes from rail cars. Even more serious is when criminals steal from the food supply chain, like from a pallet of groceries or infant formula, since they break the safety seal of the shipping container and ruin the entire cargo container of goods. I also brought up another investigation that connected thefts at a mall in Katy, Texas to a cartel that’s believed to be responsible for over $100 million in theft across the country. It’s a sweeping problem that demands swift justice. Homeland Security Investigations estimate the average American family will pay more than $500 in additional costs each year due to organized retail crime.

Q: How would your bill combat these crimes?

A: A few years ago, I convened a roundtable in Cedar Rapids to hear concerns and learn from local retail leaders and law enforcement about the rise in organized retail crimes. Since then, I’ve pushed for a coordinated response at the federal level. The Department of Homeland Security has found that cartels, terrorists and human traffickers facilitate organized retail and supply chain crime and use the proceeds to finance other crimes. It’s a criminal hamster wheel that spans the globe and demands an informed and beefed up response from the nation’s counterterrorism and intelligence agencies. At the Senate hearing in July, I asked the District Attorney for San Diego County why it’s important for prosecutors to aggregate the value of stolen goods. She explained that aggregation distinguishes between someone who shoplifts food to eat from the repeat criminal offender who goes into a store with a calculator to stay under a $950 threshold so that the criminal would only be subject to a misdemeanor. That misguided policy led to retail stores locking up merchandise, instead of prosecutors locking up the perpetrators stealing the merchandise. I was pleased to hear California changed this poppycock policy to allow prosecutors to aggregate stolen merchandise in the pursuit of justice. I’ll continue pushing in Congress for criminal action to be met with criminal punishment.  grassley.senate.gov


Fencing Operations Fueling California's Shoplifting Epidemic
‘We are all eating’: Inside California’s secret industry that props up mass shoplifting
Over the past two years, authorities in the Bay Area say they’ve uncovered evidence of hidden underground networks of stolen good buyers, colloquially referred to as fences. Known only to the thieves themselves, these groups are what largely fuel the multi-million dollar shoplifting industry.

In one case, a massive fencing operation based out of an Oakland clothing store was allegedly supplying stolen baby formula and allergy medicine to retailers in New York, using a Texas-based trucking company owned by the clothing store’s owner, according to court records. In another case, a Pacifica woman named Elvia Esquide-Perez was allegedly acquiring hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of high-end stolen purses from an East Bay gang called “F— Everyone.”

“I have teams that have been working with me for four years,” Esquide-Perez allegedly told a suspected gang member in a text message contained in a court file. “We are all eating.”

While San Ramon police were working to arrest their shoplifters, private investigators hired by retailers like Walgreens, Safeway and Rite Aid were scouring flea markets in Galt and Modesto for stolen merchandise. They reportedly found plenty of it, some with the anti-theft devices still attached.

Other fencers have been tied to the flea market in Galt, a town on Highway 99 between Sacramento and Stockton. Sacramento police say several shoplifting suspects told them of an El Sobrante resident who was buying stolen merchandise there for re-sale, resulting in a series of 2023 raids targeting the suspect’s Parkside Drive home and several vehicles. No criminal charges were ever filed against the suspected fencer, court records show.

In another East Bay theft ring, police investigated suspected members of Oakland’s F— Everyone gang who allegedly committed 34 burglaries across California in two months, resulting in an estimated loss of $970,000 to stores. One of the men, 23-year-old Oakland resident Alejandro McDonald, was allegedly communicating with Esquide-Perez about the price for new and damaged handbags.

But perhaps the most sprawling investigation in recent memory led federal and state investigators to the 1900 block of Fruitvale Avenue, to an Oakland business known to some seedy locals as the “h– store,” because it sells lingeries and skimpy clothing typically worn by sex workers. A surveillance operation in 2021-2022 — during the coronavirus pandemic — captured people showing up with bags of suspected stolen baby formula and allergy pills, which were transferred by hand truck into vans and trucks. eagletribune.com


Should Stores Be Punished When Shopping Carts Are Stolen?
CA bill would fine stores for theft of their shopping carts
The California Senate and now a key Assembly committee have passed a bill that would allow cities to charge businesses up to $650 for returning shopping carts stolen from them. The measure, Senate Bill 753, was introduced at the urging of the city of San Jose, which faces major homelessness and budget crises.

“[San Jose] Mayor Mahan has a homelessness problem and a budget problem, and his solution to solve both of those is to charge retailers more to get their stolen property back,” said Daniel Conway of the California Grocers Association at the California Assembly Local Government Committee hearing that advanced the bill. “Our property is being stolen and taken offsite.”

Under current law, cities can only charge businesses $50 for each shopping cart found and retrieved by the city off of the businesses’ property after the first three violations within a six-month period, or for failing to pick up retrieved carts within three business days.

Shopping carts also currently have to be held for 30 days before the city disposes of them, which bill author state Sen. Dave Cortese, D-San Jose, said creates a nuisance for cities. Cortese’s bill would authorize cities to return the carts to businesses, and charge the businesses up to $500 for the service of returning each cart and up to an additional $150 in fines.

“The bill modernizes California law by allowing cities to immediately collect abandoned shopping carts, return them directly to retailers without a three-day waiting period, and recover the actual costs associated with managing cart recovery program,” said Cortese in support of the bill.

Assemblywoman Rhodesia Ransom, D-Tracy, who abstained from voting for or against the bill — which passed with zero “no” votes but four abstentions — shared her concern that it’s unfair to charge businesses for being victims of crime. myhometowntoday.com


The Self-Checkout Dilemma Continues
Target, Walmart, retail theft, and the self-checkout dilemma
To be fair, some customers appreciated the ease and convenience of self-checkout. Introverted shoppers, folks making personal purchases, or people who just don't want to wait in line tend to prefer the ease of a self-checkout kiosk.

But as they became more popular during Covid, when many more retailers relied almost exclusively on self checkout to keep things moving, plenty more customers began to take advantage of the system.

Theft, whether accidental or intentional, spiked with the use of self-checkouts. It's not all due to malicious intent — roughly one fifth of thefts happen accidentally.

But the fact is that fewer folks are entering retail as a line of work, which means a lot of these kiosks are here to stay. Still, retailers that have faced the biggest challenges with the automated technology have curtailed customer privileges.

In 2024, Target began limiting customers using self-checkout to 10 items or fewer. And Walmart has been tailoring its approach to self-checkout on a store-by-store basis. One Walmart store in Missouri eliminated its self-checkout options entirely after a costly bout with theft since Covid. thestreet.com

 
The Debate Over Locked Store Shelves
Everyone Hates Locked Shelves. Even the Retailers.

On today’s Big Take podcast, why retailers started locking their shelves, and why some of them have started to reconsider that strategy.

If you’ve been to a store like CVS, Walgreens or Target in the last few years, you may have noticed a trend: more and more essentials are locked up behind plexiglass walls. The strategy started as an anti-theft measure. But there’s little evidence that it’s worked.  bloomberg.com
 

What's causing a spike in organized retail theft in Baton Rouge?

New task force launches in Houston to take on transnational crime
 

The Win-Win of Facial Recognition: Safer Stores & Less Friction
Facial Recognition Could Revolutionize Customer Service — Without Touching Loyalty Programs

By the D&D Daily staff

When most people think of facial recognition in retail, they jump straight to theft prevention. But there’s a less flashy, under-discussed use case that could quietly reshape the customer experience: personalized service without friction.

Retailers have spent decades chasing the holy grail of personalization—usually through loyalty cards, apps, or email programs. But the truth is, most shoppers don’t scan their app every time or want to be bombarded with offers. Facial recognition opens the door to a smoother, opt-in approach: recognizing returning customers at the door or checkout and tailoring their experience in real time.

Imagine a customer walks into a store and is privately recognized by a system they’ve opted into. No card swipe. No app. Just a seamless greeting: “Welcome back, Sam. That pair of shoes you looked at last week is on display near the register.” Or a reminder at checkout: “You have a store credit available.”

This isn’t science fiction—it’s already being piloted in select retail environments overseas. Facial recognition allows stores to quietly connect past behaviors to current visits, offering helpful insights without requiring effort from the customer. It’s like loyalty—but invisible, automatic, and frictionless.

Critics often raise privacy concerns, but these programs are strictly opt-in. The shopper chooses to be recognized—just like they choose to sign up for email deals. And in return, they get faster service, more relevant recommendations, and fewer irrelevant ads.

The potential here goes far beyond marketing. Store associates could be alerted to preferred sizing, color preferences, or past purchases—all without asking the customer to dig through emails or loyalty numbers. In a world where consumers want personalization without hassle, facial recognition may be the bridge.

Retailers have been chasing “the right message to the right person at the right time” for years. Facial recognition, used responsibly and transparently, might finally deliver on that promise—without a QR code in sight.


Less Selection, Higher Prices:
How tariffs are shaping the holiday shopping season
With summer in full swing in the United States, retail executives are sweating a different season. It’s less than 22 weeks before Christmas, a time when businesses that make and sell consumer goods usually nail down their holiday orders and prices.

But President Donald Trump’s vacillating trade policies, part of his effort to revive the nation’s diminished manufacturing base and to reduce the U.S. deficit in exported goods, have complicated those end-of-year plans. Balsam Hill, which sells artificial trees and other decorations online, expects to publish fewer and thinner holiday catalogs because the featured products keep changing with the tariff — import tax — rates the president sets, postpones and revises.

The consequences for consumers? Stores may not have the specific gift items customers want come November and December. Some retail suppliers and buyers scaled back their holiday lines rather than risking a hefty tax bill or expensive imports going unsold. Businesses still are setting prices but say shoppers can expect many things to cost more, though by how much depends partly on whether Trump’s latest round of “reciprocal” tariffs kicks in next month. apnews.com


Retailers Paying the Price for DEI Reversals?
Why many Black Americans are boycotting big-box retail stores: ‘using my money to resist’

People are shutting their wallets to firms such as Target and Amazon, who followed in Trump’s footsteps to undo DEI

Renard-Wilson is among a growing group of African Americans who are ditching corporate big-box retail stores who rolled back their DEI programs and instead are shopping at small, minority- and women-owned businesses they believe value their dollars more. In February, more than 250,000 people signed a pledge to boycott Target after Rev Jamal Bryant, pastor of New Birth Baptist church outside of Georgia, called for a 40-day Target Fast that started at the beginning of the Lenten season.

The boycott has become a movement across social media and within community neighborhoods nationwide with the shared goal of rejecting systems that do not value the African American community, and it has already impacted Target. In the first quarter of the year, the company reported a $500m loss in year-over-year sales, citing reaction to the boycott and lower foot traffic. theguardian.com


Port of Oakland shipments drop as tariffs spur ‘market recalibration’ in trade
The Port recorded a 10.1% drop in June over the previous month as Trump’s tariffs cast uncertainty into trade relationships abroad

Target to stop price matching retailers

Deodorant recall: More than 67,000 cases sold at Walmart, Dollar Tree, Amazon

FDA Authorizes Juul’s E-Cigarettes After Ban Nearly Bankrupted Firm

Last week's #1 article --