Across Europe, the cost of handling returns has grown so rapidly that in several sectors it now consumes 20–25% of total logistics expenses. Retail, e-commerce, electronics, and even B2B supply chains show a similar pattern: returns are no longer an operational routine – they are a structural financial burden that directly affects margins. RoadFreightCompany sees this trend across multiple markets, and the underlying reason goes far beyond “customers send too much back.”
The fundamental issue is the structural disconnect between forward logistics and reverse logistics. European supply chains were built for decades around one-way, stable, predictable flows. Reverse logistics was treated as an exception – a side function, not a dedicated process with its own routes, KPIs, SLAs, and cost-to-serve logic. As a result, companies today face an expensive, fragmented process where every return becomes a small, unplanned project rather than part of a controlled network.
The most costly part of the return chain is not transportation but processing: quality checks, reclassification, documentation, sorting, repackaging, and determining resale or liquidation paths. For electronics, a single return can involve 7–10 steps; for fashion, up to 14. At that point, the traditional economics of logistics break down – every step adds cost, while the resale value of goods often decreases faster than processing time.
RoadFreightCompany also notes that geography intensifies the expense. A large share of European returns flow back to hubs that are not optimally located for cost-effective handling. Many e-commerce companies consolidate returns in Germany or the Benelux region, while most returns originate in Italy, Spain, France, or Eastern Europe. This creates long, low-value reverse routes that still require transport capacity, documentation, and sorting resources. When returns cannot be consolidated efficiently, the cost per pallet can double.
Visibility adds another layer of complexity. Even with TMS and OMS platforms, most returns operate under a “blind processing” model: the company learns about an incoming return after it has already been shipped. The result is warehouse overload, underutilized routes, and unpredictable sorting workloads. Without accurate ETA data for returns, businesses cannot plan shifts, allocate storage capacity, or prepare consolidation schedules. RoadFreightCompany sees that companies with high visibility into reverse flows reduce reverse-logistics costs by an average of 12–18%.
Regulatory pressure is now amplifying the challenge. The EU is tightening environmental rules, reporting requirements, and product-handling standards. Fashion returns increasingly require proof-of-inspection; electronics require full traceability. This transforms every return from “a parcel to move” into a compliance object – more documentation, more validation steps, and more time.
The real reason returns have become so expensive isn’t the volume – it’s the fact that European supply chains were never designed for reverse flow. Reverse logistics behaves differently from forward logistics: unstable volumes, inconsistent product condition, low-density routes, complex documentation, margin erosion, and the absence of standardized operational control. Trying to force reverse flows into forward-logistics systems guarantees inefficiency.
Companies that invest in dedicated return networks – regional sorting hubs, pre-sorting at customer locations, integrated TMS for reverse flows, and structured consolidation models – are already reducing costs by 15–20%. But these gains come only when returns are treated as a strategic supply chain, not a side effect.
RoadFreightCompany works with reverse flows across Germany, Benelux, and Central Europe and observes the same conclusion in every market: returns have become a full-fledged supply chain. And like any supply chain, it requires design, structure, and deliberate management.
If businesses want to regain cost control, they must stop treating returns as an afterthought. Reverse logistics is its own network – with its own economics, constraints, and optimization levers. Only then will it stop consuming a quarter of total logistics spend – and become predictable, manageable, and in some cases even value-creating.