IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ucp/jlstud/doi10.1086-718911.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Regulating Product Return Policies: The Trade-off between Efficiency and Distribution

Author

Listed:
  • Shmuel I. Becher
  • Eberhard Feess
  • Roee Sarel

Abstract

The proliferation of product returns entails substantial financial and environmental costs. Nonetheless, regulators typically restrict firms from charging consumers high fees for returning products, which facilitates returns. To analyze the consequences of such interventions, we consider a market in which consumers have private information about their expected consumption utility. We show that monopolistic sellers have an incentive to inefficiently trigger too many returns even without regulation, as low return fees enable them to screen consumers and reap their surplus. Regulators then face a trade-off: upper bounds on return fees exacerbate inefficiency by causing sellers to trigger even more returns but also lead to a redistribution of wealth from monopolistic sellers to consumers. This trade-off also arises when consumers have an endowment effect. However, if sellers can induce overoptimistic beliefs about the utility from consumption (for example, through advertisements), upper bounds on return fees may also lead to higher social welfare.

Suggested Citation

  • Shmuel I. Becher & Eberhard Feess & Roee Sarel, 2023. "Regulating Product Return Policies: The Trade-off between Efficiency and Distribution," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 52(1), pages 137-191.
  • Handle: RePEc:ucp:jlstud:doi:10.1086/718911
    DOI: 10.1086/718911
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/718911
    Download Restriction: Access to the online full text or PDF requires a subscription.

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/718911
    Download Restriction: Access to the online full text or PDF requires a subscription.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1086/718911?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ucp:jlstud:doi:10.1086/718911. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Journals Division (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/JLS .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.