Commitments and Contingencies	3 Months Ended
Commitments and Contingencies	Mar. 31, 2022
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]
Commitments and Contingencies	Commitments and Contingencies Shareholder lawsuits On January 25, 2022, a lawsuit entitled Shiva Stein v. Lawson Products, Inc. et al., Case No. 1:22-cv-00639, was filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York against Lawson and the members of the Lawson board of directors (the “Stein Action”). On January 27, 2022, a lawsuit entitled Matthew Hopkins v. Lawson Products, Inc. et al, Case No. 1:22-cv-00724, was filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York against Lawson and the members of the Lawson board of directors (the “Hopkins Action”). On February 7, 2022, a lawsuit entitled Ema Bell v. Lawson Products, Inc. et al, Case No. 1:22-cv-01056, was filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York against Lawson, the members of the Lawson board of directors, LKCM TE Investors, LLC (the “TestEquity Equityholder”), TestEquity, Tide Sub, LLC, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Lawson (“Merger Sub 1”), 301 HW Opus Investors, LLC, (the “Gexpro Services Stockholder”), Gexpro Services and Gulf Sub, Inc., a wholly-owned subsidiary of Lawson (“Merger Sub 2”) (the “Bell Action”). On February 11, 2022, a lawsuit entitled John Yurco v. Lawson Products, Inc. et al., Case No. 1:22-cv-01201, was filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York against Lawson and the members of the Lawson board of directors (the “Yurco Action”). On February 24, 2022, the Yurco Action was voluntarily dismissed by the plaintiff. On March 3, 2022, a lawsuit entitled Katherine Finger v. Lawson Products, Inc. et al., Case No. 1:22-cv-00287, was filed in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware against Lawson and the members of the Lawson board of directors (the “Finger Action”). On March 5, 2022, a lawsuit entitled John Kelly v. Lawson Products, Inc. et al., Case No. 1:22-cv-01894, was filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York against Lawson and the members of the Lawson board of directors (the “Kelly Action”). On March 7, 2022, a lawsuit entitled Lewis D. Baker v. Lawson Products, Inc. et al., Case No. 2:22-cv-00842, was filed in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania against Lawson and the members of the Lawson board of directors (the “Baker Action”). On March 10, 2022, the Stein Action and the Kelly Action were voluntarily dismissed by the respective plaintiffs. On March 17, 2022, the Hopkins Action and the Baker Action were voluntarily dismissed by the respective plaintiffs. On March 24, 2022, the Bell Action was voluntarily dismissed by the plaintiff. The Finger Action alleges that the defendants violated Sections 14(a) (and Rule 14a-9 promulgated thereunder) and 20(a) of the Exchange Act by, among other things, omitting certain allegedly material information with respect to the Mergers (as defined in Note 1) in the Company's proxy statement. The Finger Action seeks, among other things, injunctive relief, money damages and the costs of the Finger Action, including reasonable attorneys’ and experts’ fees. Lawson and the members of its board of directors disagree with and intend to vigorously defend against the Finger Action. If the Finger Action is not resolved favorably, the Finger Action could result in additional costs to Lawson, including costs associated with the indemnification of directors. Additional plaintiffs may file lawsuits against Lawson and/or its directors and officers in connection with the Mergers. For example, on March 9, 2022, purported Lawson stockholder Keith Butler sent a letter to Lawson demanding that Lawson amend or supplement the Company’s proxy statement with information with respect to the Mergers. At this time, the Company is unable to estimate the ultimate outcome of the Finger Action or meaningfully quantify how the final resolution of the Finger Action may impact on its business, financial condition and results of operations. In addition, on each of February 2, 2022, February 14, 2022 and February 15, 2022, purported Lawson stockholders made demands pursuant to Section 220 of the Delaware General Corporation Law to inspect certain books and records of Lawson (collectively, the “Books and Records Demands”). One stated purpose of the Books and Records Demands is to investigate questions of director disinterestedness and independence and the alleged possibility of wrongdoing, mismanagement and/or material non-disclosure related to the Special Committee’s and the Lawson board of directors’ approval of the Mergers. In addition, on March 16, 2022, one of the purported Lawson stockholders who previously made a Books and Records Demand filed a lawsuit entitled Robert Garfield v. Lawson Products, Inc., Case No. 2022-0252, in the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware against Lawson (the “Garfield Action”). On March 22, 2022, another of the purported Lawson stockholders who previously made a Books and Records Demand filed a lawsuit entitled Jeffrey Edelman v. Lawson Products, Inc., Case No. 2022-0270, in the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware against Lawson (the “Edelman Action”). The Garfield Action and the Edelman Action are collectively referred to as the “Books and Records Actions.” The Books and Records Actions seek to compel inspection of certain books and records of Lawson to investigate questions of director disinterestedness and independence and the alleged possibility of wrongdoing, mismanagement and/or material non-disclosure related to the Special Committee’s and the Lawson board of directors’ approval of the Mergers. Pursuant to a stipulation approved by Delaware Court of Chancery on March 24, 2022, the Books and Records Actions are being held in abeyance until May 23, 2022. Lawson and the members of its board of directors disagree with and intend to vigorously defend against the Books and Records Actions and any claim, if asserted, arising from the other Books and Records Demands. Due to the inherent uncertainties of these demands, the Company is not able to predict either the outcome of these demands on its business, financial condition and results of operations, or a range of reasonably possible losses, if any, at this time. Accordingly, no amounts have been recorded in the condensed consolidated financial statements for these matters. Environmental matter In 2012, it was determined a Company owned site in Decatur, Alabama, contained hazardous substances in the soil and groundwater as a result of historical operations prior to the Company's ownership. The Company retained an environmental consulting firm to further investigate the contamination, prepare a remediation plan, and enroll the site in the Alabama Department of Environmental Management (“ADEM”) voluntary cleanup program. A remediation plan was approved by ADEM in 2018. The plan consists of chemical injections throughout the affected area, as well as subsequent monitoring of the area. The injection process was completed in the first quarter of 2019 and the environmental consulting firm is monitoring the affected area. At March 31, 2022 the Company had less than $0.1 million accrued for potential monitoring costs. The costs for future monitoring are not significant and have been fully accrued. The Company does not expect to capitalize any amounts related to the remediation plan.