Bill Overview
Title: Combating Organized Retail Crime Act of 2022
Description: This bill expands federal enforcement of criminal offenses related to organized retail crime. Organized retail crime typically refers to large-scale retail theft and fraud by organized groups of professional shoplifters, or boosters, who make money by stealing merchandise and reselling it for a fraction of the retail cost. First, with respect to criminal offenses involving the transportation of stolen property across state lines and the sale or receipt of stolen goods, the bill broadens the scope of conduct that qualifies as offenses. Additionally, the bill makes the offenses predicate offenses (i.e., underlying offenses) for prosecutions under the federal money laundering statute and authorizes the criminal forfeiture of any property representing or traceable to the gross proceeds obtained as a result of an offense or a conspiracy to commit an offense. Second, with respect to criminal offenses involving theft from an interstate or foreign shipment, the bill makes an offense an underlying offense for prosecution under the federal money laundering statute and authorizes the criminal forfeiture of any property representing or traceable to the gross proceeds obtained as a result of an offense or a conspiracy to commit an offense. Finally, the bill establishes a center—the Organized Retail Crime Coordination Center—within the Department of Homeland Security to coordinate the federal law enforcement activities related to organized retail crime.
Sponsors: Sen. Grassley, Chuck [R-IA]
Target Audience
Population: People involved or affected by organized retail crime
Estimated Size: 300000000
- The bill targets organized retail crime, which involves professional shoplifters and fencing operations.
- Retail businesses, especially those experiencing losses from organized retail crime, will be impacted by the bill as it expands federal enforcement.
- Consumers could be impacted indirectly as reduced losses from theft may lead to decreased prices or improved availability of goods.
- Federal and state law enforcement agencies will be impacted as they coordinate to enforce the expanded measures under this bill.
- The retail industry's competitive position against crime networks will be improved, potentially impacting global retail activities.
Reasoning
- The organized retail crime legislation targets a specific yet widespread issue affecting retailers, law enforcement, and consumers.
- The target population includes those directly involved in organized retail crime and those affected by its consequences, such as retailers and consumers.
- With a budget constrained to $150,000,000 in the first year, the policy can significantly impact large retailers, but smaller businesses might not benefit immediately.
- Retailers experiencing loss from organized retail crime may see improved conditions due to enhanced law enforcement measures, potentially affecting their wellbeing positively.
- Consumers may benefit indirectly from possibly reduced prices and increased product availability, though these impacts might be more gradual.
- Federal law enforcement personnel will see an increased workload but also more resources to tackle organized crime, possibly leading to mixed effects on wellbeing.
- The common public might not feel a large impact unless they are directly working in affected retail or law enforcement sectors.
Simulated Interviews
Retail Store Manager (Dallas, TX)
Age: 45 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- As a store manager, I'm hopeful that this policy will reduce theft and allow us to improve customer experience.
- I think this measure will help us save on security costs long-term, possibly allowing for better wages or product offerings.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 4 |
Small Business Owner (New York, NY)
Age: 32 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I support tougher laws against organized crime, but I wonder if this will actually affect my small store.
- Most theft issues I face aren't organized, so I'm unsure about direct benefits to my business.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Law Enforcement Officer (Chicago, IL)
Age: 27 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- With the new resources, we might be more effective in tackling large-scale theft networks.
- However, increased workload might strain our team without proportional benefits.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Regional Retail Director (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 40 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Organized retail theft has cost us extensively, and this bill could help mitigate that.
- I believe this could lower our operational costs and enhance security because it tackles the root of the problem.
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 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 5 |
E-commerce Specialist (Portland, OR)
Age: 22 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I think the bill's impacts on physical retail theft might indirectly benefit e-commerce by reducing fraudulent returns and exchanges.
- Our platform's focus on security may be bolstered by decreased organized crime activities.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
Retired Law Enforcement (Atlanta, GA)
Age: 55 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Retired now, but I see this bill as a positive step towards supporting retail and tackling organized crime.
- I hope it translates into real benefits for retailers rather than just additional paperwork.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Consumer (Miami, FL)
Age: 30 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I've seen the effects of theft on product availability and prices.
- If the policy succeeds, I hope to see more availability and better prices.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Retail Loss Prevention Officer (Seattle, WA)
Age: 29 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 11/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This bill should help us catch and deter organized groups which are difficult to manage with current resources.
- However, we’ll need to see how quickly federal assistance will impact local efforts.
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 | 7 | 5 |
Retail Analyst (Denver, CO)
Age: 50 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- If the bill diminishes organized theft, market conditions could improve, enhancing retail stability.
- Predicting impact will vary by region and the effectiveness of law enforcement involvement.
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 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Economist (Houston, TX)
Age: 60 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The economic implications of combating organized retail crime could yield extensive benefits if implemented effectively.
- While the approach is sound theoretically, the actual execution will be crucial in determining long-term economic improvements.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 8 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $150000000 (Low: $100000000, High: $200000000)
Year 2: $160000000 (Low: $110000000, High: $220000000)
Year 3: $170000000 (Low: $120000000, High: $230000000)
Year 5: $190000000 (Low: $140000000, High: $260000000)
Year 10: $220000000 (Low: $170000000, High: $300000000)
Year 100: $500000000 (Low: $250000000, High: $750000000)
Key Considerations
- Coordinating interagency efforts is vital for effective enforcement, potentially involving significant one-time setup costs and ongoing operational expenses.
- The relationships between retail loss reduction and consumer pricing or availability may take time to manifest in tangible savings or economic impacts.