Policy Impact Analysis - 117/HR/7499

Bill Overview

Title: Improving Federal Investigations of Organized Retail Crime Act of 2022

Description: 2022 This bill requires various federal agencies to develop a strategy to improve coordination with state and local law enforcement entities to address organized retail crime. Specifically, the bill requires the Department of Justice, the Department of Homeland Security, the U.S. Postal Service, and other relevant agencies to improve federal information sharing about organized retail crime networks, assist state and local law enforcement in compiling materials and evidence needed to prosecute organized retail crime, and increase cooperation and information sharing with the retail industry and retail crime task forces. The bill also requires the Government Accountability Office to report on private sector and law enforcement collaboration to deter and investigate organized retail crime.

Sponsors: Rep. Kim, Young [R-CA-39]

Target Audience

Population: Individuals globally affected by improved investigations in organized retail crime

Estimated Size: 330000000

Reasoning

Simulated Interviews

Retail Manager (New York, NY)

Age: 45 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 20.0 years

Commonness: 14/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The current level of organized retail crime is concerning and affects our store's profitability.
  • Increased collaboration between law enforcement and retailers could deter crime and improve safety.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 5
Year 2 7 5
Year 3 8 5
Year 5 8 5
Year 10 9 5
Year 20 9 5

Police Officer (San Francisco, CA)

Age: 32 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 10/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Enhanced information sharing will streamline investigations.
  • Resource allocation will be crucial to effectively addressing the issue.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 6
Year 2 7 6
Year 3 7 5
Year 5 8 5
Year 10 8 5
Year 20 8 5

Small Business Owner (Dallas, TX)

Age: 28 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 4

Duration of Impact: 15.0 years

Commonness: 8/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Small stores struggle with the financial pressure of theft.
  • Federal support can help us operate safely and profitably.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 5 4
Year 2 6 4
Year 3 7 4
Year 5 7 4
Year 10 8 4
Year 20 8 4

Retail Worker (Chicago, IL)

Age: 23 | Gender: other

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 16/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Safety concerns arise frequently during my shifts.
  • Improved law enforcement coordination might make my workplace safer.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 5
Year 2 6 5
Year 3 7 5
Year 5 7 5
Year 10 8 5
Year 20 8 5

Retail Investor (Miami, FL)

Age: 39 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 20.0 years

Commonness: 9/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The losses due to theft cut into dividends and stock valuations.
  • I support stronger crime deterrence to protect investments.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 7
Year 2 8 7
Year 3 8 7
Year 5 9 7
Year 10 9 7
Year 20 9 7

Retired Teacher (Los Angeles, CA)

Age: 61 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 15.0 years

Commonness: 15/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Price hikes due to theft impact my fixed income.
  • A safer retail environment would improve my shopping experience.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 6
Year 2 6 6
Year 3 7 6
Year 5 7 6
Year 10 8 6
Year 20 8 6

Organized Crime Ring Member (Houston, TX)

Age: 26 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 3/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Increased federal presence will complicate our operations.
  • My future in this business is uncertain with such policies.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 5 7
Year 2 5 7
Year 3 5 7
Year 5 5 7
Year 10 5 7
Year 20 5 7

Social Worker (Atlanta, GA)

Age: 34 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 12/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Coordinated efforts could address root causes of retail crime.
  • Community engagement is essential for long-term impact.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 7
Year 2 8 7
Year 3 8 7
Year 5 8 7
Year 10 9 7
Year 20 9 7

Supply Chain Analyst (Seattle, WA)

Age: 40 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 15.0 years

Commonness: 11/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Theft leads to disruptions in supply chain logistics.
  • Improving security could stabilize product availability.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 5
Year 2 7 5
Year 3 7 5
Year 5 8 5
Year 10 8 5
Year 20 8 5

Tech Entrepreneur (Phoenix, AZ)

Age: 30 | Gender: other

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 7/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This policy presents new opportunities for tech innovation.
  • Partnerships with enforcement agencies are beneficial for growth.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 6
Year 2 7 6
Year 3 8 6
Year 5 8 6
Year 10 8 6
Year 20 9 6

Cost Estimates

Year 1: $330000000 (Low: $250000000, High: $420000000)

Year 2: $300000000 (Low: $220000000, High: $400000000)

Year 3: $270000000 (Low: $200000000, High: $380000000)

Year 5: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)

Year 10: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)

Year 100: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)

Key Considerations