Forfeiture Policy in the United States

Documented Abuses and Uncertain Benefits of Civil Asset Forfeiture

“…11). In his policy essay, David Pimentel (, this issue) expresses a similar sentiment when he concludes that “the public outcry will need to be particularly strong to counter” the police agencies’ interest in preserving their opportunity to police for profit.…”

“…If police bureaucracies respond to incentives as predicted by economic theory and emphasized by Holcomb et al. () and Pimental (), police agencies will increase effort in activities that have a higher probability of generating forfeited assets and, because of limited personnel, cut back on non–revenue‐enhancing activities. This is policing for profit.…”

“…Jefferson Holcomb, Marian Williams, William Hicks, Tomislav Kovandzic, and Michele Bisaccia Meitl (, this issue) and Pimentel () indicate that it is the policing for profit that generates most of the scholarly, legal, and media criticism of civil asset forfeiture. They point out that the federal government's practice of “equitable sharing” allows state and local police agencies to have various federal agencies “adopt” cases for a service fee of 20% of the take.…”

“…Second is the principle of economics that people and institutions, such as police bureaucracies, respond to incentives. Both Holcomb et al (2018) and Pimentel (2018) emphasize that asset forfeiture gives police an incentive to change their behavior as they seek to increase revenue-generating activities. A third issue is whether asset forfeiture activities in fact impose costs on a sufficient number of criminals such that the crime rate falls because the financial returns to criminals are reduced.…”

“…Nevertheless, a lower clearance rate for property crime might lead to political pressures on police bureaucracies such that they would prefer to reduce activities that do not generate measures that can be used to evaluate their performance. Pimentel () suggests that not responding to domestic violence is a possible trade‐off that might not show up in statistics that would reflect badly on police agencies. Police agencies could reduce any number of activities that would escape notice by the voting public.…”