Shoplifting, the Impact on businesses and possible systemic changes to Justice

Increase in SHOPLIFTING

I intended on posting some thoughts in relation to this article some time ago, and while it might be a bit dated, it nevertheless provides this Calgary criminal lawyer the opportunity to address what is probably one of the most common – if not the most common – criminal offence in Canada: Theft.

I am fairly certain that almost everyone who reads this post knows someone who has stolen something.  As a defence lawyer in Alberta, it’s my job and my business to do everything that I can within the boundaries of the law and ethical conduct to defend my clients – including those charged with theft. While this is my job, and one that I take very seriously (because I am of the view that it is very important to hold the State accountable), I also grew up with parents who ran a small business.  I can appreciate the pressure on businesses forced to shoulder losses from missing product.

According to the CBC article,  ‘Enough is enough’: Small business owners frustrated as shoplifting keeps rising” -- news originally posted on October 27^th, 2025 –  “retail” theft is up a whopping 384% since 2015. 

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa/small-business-owners-say-shoplifting-is-on-the-rise-9.6954339

As written:

“A set of reports going before…the Ottawa Police Services Board show that shoplifting was up 384 per cent between 2015 and 2024, and that councillors and shop owners have serious concerns about safety issues and lost product”.

If true, this is indeed a startling revelation and one that is no doubt having a massive economic impact on the very businesses Canadian’s rely on. When I say “rely on”, I don’t just mean that these businesses sell product that we all need or want, but that these businesses employ people, pay taxes, serve the public – essentially doing yeoman’s private industry work as essential oil lubricating Canada’s economic engine.

Theft as Defined by the Criminal Code of canada

Pursuant to s. 322 of the Criminal Code of Canada,

• (1)Every one commits theft who fraudulently and without colour of right takes, or fraudulently and without colour of right converts to his use or to the use of another person, anything, whether animate or inanimate, with intent
  • (a)to deprive, temporarily or absolutely, the owner of it, or a person who has a special property or interest in it, of the thing or of his property or interest in it;
  • (b)to pledge it or deposit it as security;
  • (c)to part with it under a condition with respect to its return that the person who parts with it may be unable to perform; or
  • (d)to deal with it in such a manner that it cannot be restored in the condition in which it was at the time it was taken or converted.

(2) A person commits theft when, with intent to steal anything, he moves it or causes it to move or to be moved, or begins to cause it to become movable.

(3) A taking or conversion of anything may be fraudulent notwithstanding that it is effected without secrecy or attempt at concealment.

(4) For the purposes of this Act, the question whether anything that is converted is taken for the purpose of conversion, or whether it is, at the time it is converted, in the lawful possession of the person who converts it is not material.

Depending on the circumstances and the value of the allegedly thieved item, theft may be prosecuted summarily or by indictment.  Section 334 of the Criminal Code defines the punishment for theft:

Except where otherwise provided by law, every one who commits theft

• (a)if the property stolen is a testamentary instrument or the value of what is stolen is more than $5,000, is guilty of
  • (i)an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term of not more than 10 years, or
  • (ii)an offence punishable on summary conviction; or
• (b)if the value of what is stolen is not more than $5,000, is guilty
  • (i)of an indictable offence and is liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years, or
  • (ii)of an offence punishable on summary conviction.

Alternative Measures

In difficult economic times there is no doubt a significant amount of pressure on Canadians to pay bills, put food on the table and care for their loved ones. The CBC writer acknowledged that food insecurity could be a cause of increased theft.

“The rise in retail thefts, she added, could be a symptom of larger issues like poverty and food insecurity”.

Since first appearing in Provincial Court in 1999, this Calgary criminal lawyer has handled the entire spectrum of theft, fraud and possession of stolen property charges; the majority being summary matters of a value well below $5000.00.

In our criminal law, petty theft has historically been considered a less serious, perhaps even trivial criminal offence.  It has historically not been taken as seriously by police, the Crown or the Courts.

As reported by the CBC:

When a petty thief is caught, the “…option is to call police, but…they [the police] don’t consider shoplifting an emergency,…[and thus] it can take upwards of… hours for officers to arrive”.

It is common for low level property offences to be dealt by a program called “Alternative Measures”.  Since its inception in Canada, the Alternative Measures Program (AMP) is the most oft used tool to address first time offenders charged with minor shoplifting allegations.

For decades, the most common persons accused of theft were young people, the homeless or folks seriously down on their luck.  It was not uncommon to encounter single mothers trying to raise children or fathers who had just lost a job. Certainly, many of those same people are working through our criminal justice system today; but what this defence lawyer is seeing more and more are folks who seem to be committing theft born out of entitlement, who have an understanding that first time shoplifters are automatically gifted a get out of jail – AMP – free card.  

A purpose of this is post is to warn folks that the days of petty shoplifting being treated with kid-gloves may be coming to an end. From speaking to some Crown Prosecutors, this Calgary criminal lawyer can report that there is a growing concern about theft in Alberta communities.  According the CBC report, there is a call for systemic change.  There is a reasonable possibility that changes responding to shoplifting may be coming in order to protect businesses; for business is essential to Canada’s economy.

For every narcissistic Robin Hood who honestly believes that stealing from businesses is harmless activity, it is important to understand that diminishing that business reduces that business’ ability to continue to exist. When a business’ existence is put at risk, every person employed by that business is also at risk. It’s a vicious circle; for as businesses go out of business, people lose jobs, which results in unemployment, which causes food and housing insecurity, which then triggers more theft.

Trust Thefts

One of the most damaging kinds of theft from business comes from employees themselves. These are called “trust” offences and because they are allegedly committed by people in a position of trust (such as a cashier working the till at a retail store), they are treated much more seriously by the Courts.

It is not unusual for the Crown to pursue a very punitive sentence (including jail) in relation to trust offences. This is so because of the trust relationship. For the purpose of thinking about position of trust (or trust relationship) as it relates to businesses, one need only understand that the employer places a great deal of confidence and trust in the people it hires. Simply stated, businesses rely on employees for their very existence, and as such, when an employee violates that trust by allegedly stealing from the business, it is considered an aggravating factor by the Crown and if proven, by the Courts.

Conclusion

The impact of theft and fraud on small to medium sized retail outlets is felt sooner than that for retail giants, but even giants fall.  In Canada, we have born witness to the toppling of many once seemingly invulnerable retail giants. For example, The Hudson Bay Company (“the Bay”), Zellers and Sears (just to name a few).

When Sears filed for bankruptcy in 2017, there was an impact on its pension fund. Lifetime employees had their pensions significantly reduced.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/sears-canada-retirees-pension-eddie-lampert-court-1.4930785

Tragically, the Hudson Bay Company laid-off of over 8000 employees when it closed earlier this year.

https://globalnews.ca/news/11199378/hudsons-bay-closure-layoff-plans-june/

My point is, for every giant prostrated by our changing economy and economic losses caused by a host of factors (including theft) there are many small businesses who are forced to shutter their doors for similar reasons. Some of these businesses have even been longstanding family run businesses who could not keep up with the strangling impact of discount retail services such as Amazon and Shopify.  To quote the Big Bang Theories character Stuart Bloom:

"Why support a friend when you can support a multinational conglomerate that is crushing the life out of that friend?" 

The point that I wish to make is that every retail outlet, and indeed every private business, is critical to the fabric of our Canadian economy.  For every cost incurred by the business, to include merchandise, and the securing of that merchandise (including costly measures to protect the business from theft), there is an effect on the consumer as well as on the business itself.  For every business that is forced to close doors, that means there is a loss of jobs, loss to the community the business serves and ultimately a loss of gross domestic product (GDP) that is so important to the functionality of Canada’s costly social services and welfare net.

As I stated earlier, I am a defence lawyer and as such, it is my job to do everything that I can to defend my clients. However, the point of this article is to send a message that might result in people not getting charged at all. While my business essentially relies on the hardship of navigating our criminal justice system and defending criminal cases, I also understand that my business also relies on people who are able to retain me for my legal services. The irony is, when the economy falters, the trickle-down effect can impact the bottom line of criminal defence lawyers.

But the message in this article is more than merely protecting my bottom line; it is also designed to send a message that the best defence to a criminal charge is not to get charged at all. When it comes to theft, the best defence is simply not to do it.

Finally, the message of this blog post serves as a warning that systemic changes to prosecuting shoplifting may be on the horizon.

The strain on families is even higher during the holiday season. I have no doubt that every family wishes to fully stock the skirt of the Christmas tree. This Alberta criminal lawyer plans to shop local this year. I encourage everyone to support their local businesses.

David G. Chow

Calgary criminal lawyer