New federal bail and sentencing reforms taking effect July 15 will introduce a specific sentencing measure aimed at commercially motivated retail theft, as governments and industry groups continue to raise concerns about repeat offending, organized resale networks and violence affecting retail workers.
The Bail and Sentencing Reform Act, also known as Bill C-14, received royal assent on June 15 and includes more than 80 changes to the Criminal Code and related legislation.
Among the retail-specific changes is a new aggravating factor that courts must consider when sentencing an offender who committed an eligible property offence with the intention of selling, bartering or fraudulently returning the stolen merchandise.
The federal government has described the measure as a response to organized retail theft. The wording enacted by Parliament, however, is not limited to activity involving a formally organized criminal group.
The Criminal Code provision focuses on the commercial intent behind the offence, whether the property was stolen for resale, barter or fraudulent return, rather than the structure or sophistication of the people involved.
Prosecutors will not necessarily have to prove that an offender belonged to a criminal organization. The aggravating factor could apply to coordinated theft rings and professional shoplifters supplying resale networks, along with individuals stealing merchandise for commercial gain without a formal connection to organized crime.
The change gives legal recognition to a category of theft that retailers say increasingly extends beyond isolated shoplifting incidents and into repeat offending, professional resale channels and fraudulent-return activity.
New Rule Applies at Sentencing
The retail provision applies after an offender has been convicted. It does not create a new offence called organized retail theft, establish a mandatory minimum sentence or automatically require incarceration. Judges will continue to consider the full circumstances of the offence and offender and impose a proportionate sentence.
The new factor signals that theft carried out for resale, barter or fraudulent return should be treated as more serious than an otherwise comparable offence committed without a commercial motive.
It can apply to several offences involving stolen property, including theft, robbery, break-and-enter, possession of stolen goods and trafficking in property obtained through crime.
The inclusion of fraudulent merchandise returns is particularly relevant to retailers. Return schemes can involve stolen goods being brought back to stores for cash, gift cards or other forms of credit, sometimes using counterfeit or improperly obtained receipts.
The effect of the new rule will depend on the evidence presented in each case. Prosecutors may seek to establish commercial intent through surveillance, communications, online marketplace activity, repeated thefts of similar merchandise, possession of large quantities of tagged goods or links between incidents at multiple stores.
Retail loss-prevention records and cooperation between retailers, police and Crown prosecutors could therefore become increasingly important when commercially motivated theft cases reach sentencing.
Retail Measure Is Distinct from Wider Bail Changes
Although the legislation is commonly described as a bail and sentencing package, its most direct retail-specific amendment concerns sentencing.
Bill C-14 does not establish a blanket reverse onus for people accused of repeat shoplifting. Under a reverse-onus bail provision, an accused person must demonstrate why detention is not justified, departing from the usual process in which the Crown must justify detention.
The legislation creates or expands reverse-onus provisions in several areas, including violent offences, organized-crime-related auto theft, extortion, home invasion, human trafficking and certain repeat violent offending.
Those broader changes could still intersect with retail crime where an alleged incident involves violence, weapons, organized criminal activity, breaches of release conditions or a qualifying record of violent offending.
The law also directs courts to consider the number and seriousness of an accused person’s outstanding charges when assessing whether detention is necessary to maintain confidence in the administration of justice.
That may be relevant in cases involving people accused of committing repeated offences while already facing unresolved charges. It does not mean every person charged with multiple shoplifting incidents will automatically be detained.
Retail Industry Welcomes the Change
Retail Council of Canada has supported the reforms, arguing that retail crime has become a growing public-safety concern and a significant financial and operational burden.
RCC president and CEO Kim Furlong said the legislation gives the justice system stronger tools to address repeat offenders, disrupt organized crime and better protect retail workers.
The organization has repeatedly drawn attention to violence and threatening behaviour during theft incidents, along with the effects of crime on employees, customers and store operations.
Retailers have responded by increasing security spending, changing store layouts, restricting access to certain merchandise and instructing employees not to intervene directly when theft occurs.
Those measures can affect the shopping experience and create additional costs for businesses and consumers. In some stores, frequently targeted products are placed behind locked fixtures or removed from open shelves, requiring customers to ask employees for assistance.
RCC has estimated total retail shrink in Canada at approximately $9 billion annually. Shrink includes inventory losses linked to several causes, including external theft, employee misconduct, administrative errors, damage and other discrepancies.
The figure should not be interpreted as a direct measurement of merchandise stolen by organized retail criminals. It nevertheless reflects the broader financial pressure facing retailers as theft, security and inventory-control concerns grow.
An RCC study involving retailers representing more than 20,000 locations found that 76.2 per cent of respondents had experienced increased violence during theft incidents. Repeat offenders accounted for 17.7 per cent of reported arrests among participating retailers.
Latest National Data Show Continued Growth in Shoplifting
The latest complete national figures available from Statistics Canada show that police-reported shoplifting continued to rise in 2024.
Police services recorded 182,361 incidents of shoplifting valued at $5,000 or less, equivalent to 442 incidents for every 100,000 people. The rate increased by 14 per cent from 2023, marking a fourth consecutive annual increase, and was 66 per cent higher than it had been a decade earlier.
Statistics Canada has not yet released its full national police-reported crime results for 2025, meaning the 2024 results remain the most recent directly comparable national measure available as the reforms take effect.
The figures show a sustained increase in reported shoplifting, although they do not measure the full scale of retail theft or determine how much activity is tied to organized resale networks.
They also do not reveal how many unique offenders were responsible, the total value of the merchandise involved or how often an incident included threats or violence. Statistics Canada has noted that the increased availability of online police reporting may have contributed to some of the growth in recorded incidents.
More recent industry research points to growing concern about the severity of retail crime. Retail Council of Canada’s national study found that 76.2 per cent of participating retailers had experienced increased violence during theft incidents, while repeat offenders accounted for 17.7 per cent of reported arrests. The participating companies represented more than 20,000 retail locations across Canada.
Retailers have long argued that police statistics understate the problem because many incidents are never formally reported. Businesses may decide against reporting lower-value thefts because of the time involved, uncertainty about whether charges will proceed or difficulty identifying the offender.
That leaves a gap between incidents recorded internally by retailers and those appearing in national police data.
Implementation Will Determine the Impact
The new aggravating factor gives Crown prosecutors and judges an additional tool, but its influence will depend on how consistently it is used and how effectively cases are developed.
Retail Council of Canada has acknowledged that legislative reform alone will not resolve the problem. The organization has also called for stronger information sharing, adequate police and prosecution resources and better coordination across provincial and municipal boundaries.
Commercially motivated retail theft can involve offenders operating across several stores, shopping centres or jurisdictions. A series of incidents may initially appear unrelated unless retailers and police can connect the same individuals, vehicles, resale accounts or methods of operation.
The provincial administration of justice could also lead to differences in how the reforms are applied across Canada.
The federal government is responsible for the Criminal Code, while provinces and territories oversee much of the court system, Crown prosecution services and correctional infrastructure. Caseloads, resources and enforcement priorities vary between jurisdictions.
Crown attorneys have warned that the wider reforms could result in longer and more contested bail and sentencing hearings, placing additional pressure on courts, prosecutors and correctional systems.
Retail cases involving the new aggravating factor may require additional evidence and argument over whether an offender intended to resell, barter or fraudulently return stolen merchandise.
It may take time for courts to establish how much weight the factor should receive and what evidence is sufficient to prove the required intent.
Retail Impact Will Emerge Gradually
Retailers are unlikely to see a dramatic operational change when the legislation takes effect July 15.
The reform will become relevant as cases move through investigation, prosecution, conviction and sentencing. It could take months before the new factor begins appearing regularly in sentencing decisions and longer before appellate courts provide guidance on its application.
In the near term, the legislation is significant because it formally identifies theft for commercial gain as conduct warranting greater attention during sentencing.
Its longer-term importance will depend on whether police can build connected cases, prosecutors can establish commercial intent and courts apply the factor in a way that meaningfully distinguishes resale-driven theft from lower-level offending.
The reforms may also encourage closer cooperation between retailers and law enforcement, particularly where businesses can provide evidence linking incidents across multiple locations.
For retailers, the legislation represents federal recognition that theft committed for resale or fraudulent return has consequences extending beyond the value of the merchandise taken. It can affect employee safety, store operations, customer access to products and the cost of doing business.
The legal framework will be in place on July 15. Whether it produces measurable reductions in repeat and commercially motivated retail crime will depend on what happens after that date.
