Criminal Justice Data: Organized Retail Crime

May 2, 2024 R48061

Criminal Justice Data: Organized Retail Crime
May 2, 2024
Retailers and retail industry advocacy groups have expressed concern about what they see as a
general increase in retail crime, and more specifically an increase in organized retail crime
Kristin Finklea
(ORC). Reports of incidents where individuals, occasionally acting in flash mobs, storm stores to
Specialist in Domestic
steal large amounts of items, and at times assault employees, have underscored these concerns.
Security
Some law enforcement agencies have increased resources and information sharing to counter

these crimes. Additionally, some retail organizations have urged policymakers and law
enforcement to take steps to educate the public and crack down on this apparent increase in retail

crime, and more specifically ORC.
A primary barrier to measuring ORC accurately is a lack of a consistent, widely accepted definition that can be used in a
systematic and comprehensive effort to collect and report these data. Nonetheless, there is general consensus that ORC
involves coordinated theft with the intent to resell for financial gain. ORC typically refers to large-scale retail theft and fraud
by organized groups of professional shoplifters (or boosters). Organized crime rings resell illegally acquired merchandise via
a variety of fencing operations such as flea markets, swap meets, pawn shops, and online marketplaces. ORC differs from
shoplifting in that traditional shoplifters tend to steal merchandise for personal use.
A number of factors contribute to the lack of comprehensive criminal justice data on ORC. At the federal level, there is
currently no law prohibiting organized retail crime that could be used to help document the number of ORC incidents known
to federal law enforcement, specifically. Combating retail theft has primarily been handled by state and local law
enforcement under state criminal laws. While state laws prohibiting theft are the statutes that state and local law enforcement
and prosecutors have often relied on to investigate and prosecute ORC, over 30 states have enacted ORC-specific laws.
However, these laws differ by state and there is no centralized reporting system for ORC-related crimes. The Federal Bureau
of Investigation’s Uniform Crime Reporting Program, National Incident-Based Reporting System collects data on thefts
reported to state and local law enforcement, including shoplifting; however, it does not capture ORC specifically. In the
absence of comprehensive data on ORC, snapshots of data from various sources may offer insight into its extent and nature.
For instance, 78.1% of respondents to the National Retail Federation’s 2023 National Retail Security Survey indicated that
the threat of ORC was more of a priority than it had been in the prior year.
While some observers believe that ORC is a national problem, others disagree, citing anecdotal and high-profile flash mob
thefts and smash-and-grabs as driving this concern. Nonetheless, there is debate over the federal government’s role in
deterring ORC and sanctioning various actors that may be involved in committing or aiding these crimes. A principal
underlying issue is the lack of data on the scope of ORC to inform this debate. Without these data, Congress may not be able
to accurately assess the proper role of the federal government. As such, policymakers may debate various options regarding
data on ORC, including how new or existing mechanisms for collecting national crime data could be used to capture these
data and help inform policymakers on the prevalence and nature of this type of crime.
Congressional Research Service

Criminal Justice Data: Organized Retail Crime

etailers and retail industry advocacy groups have expressed concern about what they see
as a general increase in retail crime, and more specifically an increase in organized retail
R crime (ORC).1 Anecdotal reports of individuals, occasionally acting in flash mobs,
storming stores, and at times assaulting employees have underscored these concerns.2 Some law
enforcement agencies have increased resources and information sharing to counter these crimes.3
Additionally, some retail organizations have urged policymakers and law enforcement to take
steps to educate the public and crack down on an apparent increase in retail crime, and more
specifically ORC.4
However, comprehensive data on the prevalence of ORC and the proportion of retail losses
attributable to it are lacking, and estimates vary widely. This report provides an overview of
ORC, including a discussion of how it relates to overall retail losses. Additionally, it discusses the
limited sources of data on ORC and measurement challenges that prevent a full understanding of
the extent and nature of these crimes. It also includes a discussion of data-related issues
policymakers may consider as they debate the appropriate federal role in deterring ORC and
contending with the actors involved in committing or facilitating these crimes.
Conceptualizing ORC
ORC, also referred to as organized retail theft (ORT), is one form of retail crime—a broader
category that also includes employee theft, shoplifting, and robberies. ORC typically refers to
large-scale retail theft and fraud by organized groups of professional shoplifters (or boosters).
Organized crime rings resell illegally acquired merchandise via a variety of fencing operations
that use venues such as flea markets, swap meets, pawn shops, and online marketplaces. ORC
differs from traditional shoplifting in that traditional shoplifters tend to steal merchandise for
personal use. Boosters, on the other hand, are professional thieves who make money by stealing
merchandise and reselling it through legal or illegal economic outlets for a fraction of the retail
cost. Stolen and fraudulently obtained goods may be taken not only from retailers, but from
manufacturers and distributors as well. Some industry advocates have linked the proliferation of
online marketplaces to increasing ORC, because they believe these markets make reselling stolen
goods easier.5
Implications for Measuring ORC
One primary barrier to measuring ORC accurately is a lack of a consistent, widely accepted
definition that can be used in a systematic and comprehensive effort to collect and report these
data. Absent a widely accepted definition of ORC, various stakeholders define ORC for different
purposes. Nonetheless, there is general consensus that ORC involves coordinated theft with the

1 Retail Industry Leaders Association, letter to Congress, December 9, 2021,
https://rilastagemedia.blob.core.windows.net/rila-web/rila.web/media/media/pdfs/letters%20to%20hill/2021/ceo-
inform-consumers-act-final1.pdf.
2 National Public Radio, Videos of ‘flash mob’ thefts are everywhere, but are the incidents increasing?, October 9,
2023, https://www.npr.org/2023/10/09/1203697964/flash-mob-retail-thefts.
3 Andre Senior, KTVU, Bay Area law enforcement agencies hope teaming up puts end to ‘flash mob’ robberies,
December 9, 2021, https://www.ktvu.com/news/bay-area-law-enforcement-agencies-hope-teaming-up-puts-end-to-
flash-mob-robberies.
4 Michael Hanson, Retail Industry Leaders Association, Retailers Endorse INFORM Consumers Act, March 23, 2021.
5 Jason Brewer and Michael Hanson, Retail Industry Leaders Association, Organized Retail Crime, Counterfeits and
Marketplaces, https://www.rila.org/retail-works-for-all-of-us/ensuring-a-safe-sustainable-future/organized-retail-crime-
counterfeits-marketplaces.
Congressional Research Service

1

Criminal Justice Data: Organized Retail Crime

intent of resale for financial gain. Examples of these definitions and their purposes include the
following:
• The Council on Criminal Justice, for their analysis of crime data on theft—and
shoplifting, more specifically—defines ORT as “coordinated efforts between
many people in which theft is for financial gain, not personal use. These stolen
items are intended to be resold on a black market.”6
• The National Retail Federation (NRF), for its 2023 National Retail Security
Survey, defines ORC as “theft/fraud activity conducted with the intent to convert
illegally obtained merchandise, cash, cargo or cash equivalent for financial gain.
Organized retail crime typically involves a criminal enterprise that organizes
large scale thefts from a number of retail stores and employs a fencing operation
to sell the illegally obtained goods for profit. It should be distinguished from
traditional ‘shoplifting,’ which is typically a theft by a single individual of a
small number of goods for personal use or consumption.”7
In addition to the lack of a consistent definition of ORC, there is an issue of conflating it with
other forms of retail shrink—or what the NRF defines as “the measurement of losses calculated
by a retailer during a specific period of time, categorized across various means of retail loss.
Measured as a percentage of sales, shrink percentage often includes losses caused by both internal
and external theft, operational or process mistakes and systemic errors.”8 All forms of external
theft, including ORC, collectively accounted for about 36% of overall shrink, according to
respondents to the NRF’s 2023 National Retail Security Survey (NRSS).9 Without a consistent
definition of ORC, retailers and analysts may not be able to accurately parse ORC from other
forms of external theft, such as shoplifting, for the purposes of reporting and analysis. Not
separating ORC from other forms of shrink could result in policies that are not specific to
countering the unique nature of this type of crime. Some observers have also highlighted that a
portion of shrink reported by retailers falls into an unknown source category; if retailers can better
identify the sources of shrink, there may be more accurate data available for analysis.10 Moreover,
more nuanced definitions and reporting on various forms of shrink, including the portion
attributable to external theft—and ORC, specifically—may allow for better analysis of data and
trends in ORC, and more effective policies to address it.
In addition to definitional challenges, an unknown portion of ORC incidents go unreported.11 The
underreporting of crime is not unique to ORC and adds a layer of difficulty to understanding its
scope. Further, the underground activities of criminal networks, including concealing illicit
activities and reselling goods on the black market, contribute to challenges in measuring the
scope of ORC. Not unique to retail crime, these are challenges for law enforcement and analysts
in understanding the scope of the illicit activities of criminal networks.

6 Ernesto Lopez, Robert Boxerman, and Kelsey Cundiff, “Shoplifting Trends: What You Need to Know,” Council on
Criminal Justice, November 2023, https://counciloncj.org/shoplifting-trends-what-you-need-to-know/.
7 NRF, 2023 National Retail Security Survey, p. 21.
8 NRF, 2023 National Retail Security Survey, p. 20.
9 NRF, 2023 National Retail Security Survey.
10 Jennifer Fagan, “Why retail’s $100 billion ‘shrink’ crisis may not be all about shoplifting,” Fortune, January 9, 2024.
11 The NRF notes that “some retailers have policies to call the police only in response to theft incidents that involve
violence or pose a physical safety threat because of concerns that reporting all thefts would cause reputational damage.”
NRF and K2 Integrity, Organized Retail Crime: An Assessment of a Persistent and Growing Threat, November 29,
2023, p. 13
Congressional Research Service

2

Criminal Justice Data: Organized Retail Crime

Sources of ORC Data
While comprehensive data on ORC do not exist, snapshots of data from various sources may
offer some insight into its extent and nature. These data come from various sources, including
crime incident reports and retailer reports of victimization. Notably, while there have been
previous federal efforts to establish a national ORC database to track retail crime, such a
repository does not currently exist.
National ORC Database
In 2006, Congress, through provisions enacted in P.L. 109-162, directed the Attorney General and the Federal
Bureau of Investigation (FBI), in consultation with the retail community, to establish a task force to combat
organized retail theft and provide expertise to the retail community to help establish a national database—housed
in the private sector—to track organized retail theft crimes in the United States.12 For the purpose of the
database, Congress defined organized retail theft as
“(1) the violation of a state prohibition on retail merchandise theft or shoplifting, if the violation consists of the
theft of quantities of items that would not normally be purchased for personal use or consumption and for the
purpose of resel ing the items or for reentering the items into commerce;
(2) the receipt, possession, concealment, bartering, sale, transport, or disposal of any property that is know [sic]
or should be known to have been taken in violation of paragraph (1); or
(3) the coordination, organization, or recruitment of persons to undertake the conduct described in paragraph (1)
or (2).”13
The result of this legislation was the creation of the Law Enforcement Retail Partnership Network (LERPnet).14
LERPnet began as a partnership between the FBI, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, various local police
departments, individual retailers, and retail organizations including the Food Marketing Institute, NRF, and Retail
Industry Leaders Association.
In 2011, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) reviewed efforts certain retailers, law enforcement, and
federal agencies were taking to counter ORC as well as existing mechanisms for these stakeholders to col aborate
and share information.15 Among their findings, GAO noted that all five retailers interviewed by GAO cited
limitations with the national database and its functionality. While LERPnet was acquired by Verisk Retail in 201116
and underwent subsequent revisions, it has since been abandoned.17
Criminal Justice Data
One way to understand the scope of a particular crime, such as ORC, is to examine available
criminal justice administrative data. There are no comprehensive criminal justice data on ORC at
either the federal or state level. A number of factors contribute to this. At the federal level, there is
currently no law prohibiting organized retail crime, specifically. There are, however, provisions
in the U.S. Code that federal law enforcement can use to bring cases against ORC rings, including
the following:
• 18 U.S.C. §1956, laundering of monetary instruments;

12 P.L. 109-162, Title XI, Section 1105, as amended by P.L. 109-271.
13 34 U.S.C. §41505(c).
14 FBI, “FBI Partners with Retailers to Fight Organized Retail Theft,” press release, April 5, 2007,
https://archives.fbi.gov/archives/news/pressrel/press-releases/fbi-partners-with-retailers-to-fight-organized-retail-theft.
15 U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO), Organized Retail Crime: Private Sector and Law Enforcement
Collaborate to Deter and Investigate Theft, GAO-11-675, June 14, 2011.
16 Verisk Retail, “Verisk Retail Launches LERPnet Falcon,” press release, June 10, 2013, https://www.verisk.com/
company/newsroom/archive/verisk-retail-launches-lerpnet-falcon/.
17 Council on Criminal Justice, Crime Trends Working Group, Shoplifting Trends: What You Need to Know,
Methodology, https://counciloncj.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/Shoplifting_Methodology_vf2.pdf.
Congressional Research Service

3

Criminal Justice Data: Organized Retail Crime

• 18 U.S.C. §1957, engaging in monetary transactions in property derived from
specified unlawful activity;
• 18 U.S.C., Chapter 96, the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations
(RICO) provisions;
• 18 U.S.C. §2314, transportation of stolen goods, securities, moneys, fraudulent
state tax stamps, or articles used in counterfeiting; and
• 18 U.S.C. §2315, sale or receipt of stolen goods, securities, moneys, or
fraudulent state tax stamps.
The number of prosecutions under each of these statutes is not an effective proxy for the number
of ORC-specific offenses. For example, aggregate data published by the U.S. Attorneys on
prosecutions related to transportation of stolen goods do not distinguish between those cases
associated with ORC groups relative to other perpetrators.
Combating retail theft has primarily been handled by state and local law enforcement under state
criminal laws. While state laws prohibiting thefts are the statutes that state and local law
enforcement and prosecutors have often relied on to investigate and prosecute ORC, over 30
states have enacted ORC-specific laws.18 However, because ORC laws differ by state and all
states do not have ORC laws, state criminal justice administrative data cannot be used to obtain a
comprehensive picture of ORC at the national level.
FBI Crime Data Collection
The FBI collects data on certain offenses known to law enforcement. Since 1930, the FBI has
been collecting and reporting crime statistics through its Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR)
program.19 In January 2021, the FBI generally transitioned from its prior crime data reporting
system, the Summary Reporting System (SRS), in favor of the National Incident-Based Reporting
System (NIBRS).20 NIBRS collects more detailed data about a larger number of crimes than SRS
and thus is expected to improve the utility of national crime data. Participation in NIBRS is
voluntary and has been increasing since the 2021 transition.21
While NIBRS collects more detailed data about a larger number of crimes than its predecessor
system, it does not collect data on theft in a manner that allows for an understanding of ORC
separate from other types of theft. For example, analysts from the Council on Criminal Justice
(CCJ) examined 2021 NIBRS data with respect to larceny and stolen property, and identified the
following:
• Larceny/theft offenses are defined as “the unlawful taking, carrying, leading, or
riding away of property from the possession, or constructive possession, of

18 Organized Retail Crime Resource Center, ORC State Laws, http://www.orcinfo.com/state-orc-laws.html. The
National Retail Federation indicates that at least 34 states have passed ORC laws; NRF, 2023 Retail Security Survey, p.
2.
19 The UCR program was initially comprised of the Summary Reporting System (SRS), but in the late 1980s the FBI
allowed states to submit crime data through the National Incident-Based Reporting System (NIBRS).
20 For more information, see CRS Report R46668, The National Incident-Based Reporting System (NIBRS): Benefits
and Issues. Notably, because of low participation in NIBRS in 2021, the FBI accepted 2022 data submissions from law
enforcement agencies through both NIBRS and SRS in order to have more nationally representative data. FBI, “FBI
Releases 2022 Crime in the Nation Statistics,” press release, October 16, 2023, https://www.fbi.gov/news/press-
releases/fbi-releases-2022-crime-in-the-nation-statistics.
21 The FBI notes that as of May 2023, all 50 states and the District of Columbia are certified to report data to NIBRS
and 77% of the U.S. population is covered by NIBRS-reporting law enforcement agencies; see https://bjs.ojp.gov/
national-incident-based-reporting-system-nibrs.
Congressional Research Service

4

Criminal Justice Data: Organized Retail Crime

another person.”22 These offenses include pocket-picking, purse-snatching,
shoplifting, theft from buildings, theft from coin-operated machines or devices,
theft from motor vehicles, and theft of motor vehicle parts or accessories. The
FBI reported 2,967,229 larceny offenses in 2021.
• Stolen property offenses are defined as “receiving, buying, selling, possessing,
concealing or transporting any property with the knowledge that it has been
unlawfully taken, as by Burglary, Embezzlement, Fraud, Larceny, Robbery,
etc.,”23 The FBI reported 89,625 stolen property offenses in 2021.
As noted, there is some overlap between larceny offenses and stolen property offenses. This
overlap—the portion of stolen property offenses attributable to larceny—is, according to CCJ
analysts, the most likely portion of NIBRS crime data to reflect theft with the intent to resell. CCJ
analysts note that if all of the stolen property offenses were the result of larceny, “about 3% of
larcenies were committed with the intent to resell stolen items.”24 However, the NIBRS data do
not allow analysts to know which portion of stolen property offenses is the result of larceny, and
they do not allow analysts to know whether alleged perpetrators were acting on behalf of an ORC
ring.
Ad Hoc Research and Surveys on Retail Crime
In addition to available crime data, ad hoc studies and surveys can provide further perspectives
from which to examine the nature and extent of ORC. For instance, some researchers have
examined whether data on offenses that may be related to ORC can help glean insight into its
trends. For example, analysts from CCJ examined shoplifting data from 24 cities around the
country for January 2018 to June 2023.25 However, the study authors note that “crime incident
data is not suited to measure organizational retail theft.”26 They go on to explain that because
ORT is generally not a reported type of theft, it cannot be separated from the available crime data
on theft more generally. Additionally, while some shoplifting data include information on the
average value of goods stolen or the number of individuals involved, these data do not necessarily
provide insight into the prevalence of or changes in ORC specifically.
Another potential slice of data related to ORC involves the resale of goods known or suspected to
have been boosted by ORC thieves. For instance, some have identified peer-to-peer ecommerce
platforms such as Craigslist and Facebook Marketplace as popular outlets for resale of goods
stolen by ORC groups. The NRF and K2 Integrity27 examined over 8,800 listings on these two

22 FBI, Uniform Crime Reporting Program, National Incident-Based Reporting System, NIBRS Offense Definitions,
https://ucr.fbi.gov/nibrs/2018/resource-pages/nibrs_offense_definitions-2018.pdf.
23 FBI, Uniform Crime Reporting Program, National Incident-Based Reporting System, NIBRS Offense Definitions,
https://ucr.fbi.gov/nibrs/2018/resource-pages/nibrs_offense_definitions-2018.pdf.
24 Council on Criminal Justice, Crime Trends Working Group, Shoplifting Trends: What You Need to Know,
Methodology, https://counciloncj.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/Shoplifting_Methodology_vf2.pdf.
25 Ernesto Lopez, Robert Boxerman, and Kelsey Cundiff, Shoplifting Trends: What You Need to Know, Council on
Criminal Justice, November 2023, https://counciloncj.org/shoplifting-trends-what-you-need-to-know/. These analyses
used incident-level data from police departments or city websites. For more information on their methodology, see
https://counciloncj.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/Shoplifting_Methodology_vf2.pdf.
26 Ernesto Lopez, Robert Boxerman, and Kelsey Cundiff, Shoplifting Trends: What You Need to Know, Council on
Criminal Justice, November 2023, https://counciloncj.org/shoplifting-trends-what-you-need-to-know/.
27 K2 Integrity is a risk, compliance, investigations, and monitoring firm.
Congressional Research Service

5

Criminal Justice Data: Organized Retail Crime

platforms in 21 locations in 2022. They reported that “about 25% of search results for typical
ORC goods or keywords had elements associated with ORC.”28
Industry Data
Some observers have relied on industry experts to estimate the prevalence of ORC and associated
losses. The NRF administers the annual NRSS through which it and the Loss Prevention
Research Council (LPRC) survey loss prevention and asset protection professionals about retail
risks, threats, and vulnerabilities.29 According to the 2023 NRSS respondents, external theft—
including ORC—accounted for about 36% of overall inventory shrink.30 While the 2023 NRSS
does not speak to the portion of shrink specifically attributable to ORC, 78.1% of survey
respondents indicated that the threat of ORC was more of a priority than it had been in the prior
year.
The NRSS does not include data on the proportion of external theft incidents reported to law
enforcement. Some observers have suggested that these theft incidents may be under-reported to
police for a number of reasons. For instance, NRF notes that “some retailers have policies to call
the police only in response to theft incidents that involve violence or pose a physical safety threat
because of concerns that reporting all thefts would cause reputational damage.”31 And, some
retailers may build in these losses as a factor in their general cost of doing business.
Going Forward
Combating retail theft has traditionally been handled by state and local law enforcement under
state criminal laws. While some observers believe that ORC is a national problem, others
disagree, citing anecdotal high-profile flash mob thefts and smash-and-grabs as driving this
concern.32 Nonetheless, there is debate over the federal government’s role in deterring ORC and
sanctioning various actors that are involved in committing or aiding these crimes. A principal
underlying issue is the lack of data on the scope of ORC. Without these data, Congress may not
be able to accurately assess the proper role of the federal government, if any, in addressing ORC-
related issues. As such, policymakers may debate various options regarding data on ORC.
If Congress is considering bolstering data collection and availability, policymakers may debate
the utility of a database on ORC, as they have in the past. They could consider whether such a
database would be best housed within a federal entity or whether it should be housed in the
private sector and supported by the federal government. LERPnet (see text box above), in its
various iterations, had been criticized for issues relating to the utility of its link analysis tools (to
help identify patterns of criminal activity), notification mechanisms (to help push real time

28 The ORC-associated elements were “Multiple listings for the same item; Clothes in multiple sizes; Multiple listings
by one person for the same or similar items; Stock photos, no photo, or vague item descriptions; Sale located in
warehouse or storage space; Different brands or types of baby formula offered for sale in a single listing; Bulk volumes
of regular baby formula or baby diapers; Unopened packs of diapers in multiple sizes or brands; Yard sales featuring
multiple numbers of household or baby items; and, Large amounts of laundry detergent offered for a cheap price.” NRF
and K2 Integrity, Organized Retail Crime: An Assessment of a Persistent and Growing Threat, November 29, 2023, pp.
16, 45.
29 NRF, 2023 National Retail Security Survey. Participation in the survey is voluntary. The 2023 survey results
represent responses from 177 retail brands covering 28 retail sectors.
30 NRF, 2023 National Retail Security Survey.
31 NRF and K2 Integrity, Organized Retail Crime: An Assessment of a Persistent and Growing Threat, November 29,
2023, p. 13.
32 Abdallah Fayyad, Vox, “The shoplifting scare might not have been real—but its effects are,” January 7, 2024.
Congressional Research Service

6

Criminal Justice Data: Organized Retail Crime

notifications to retailers), and data entry (to allow for enabling data entry from retailers’ existing
case management systems).33 Policymakers may consider how any future database might address
these and other issues to improve upon the utility of the previous LERPnet system.
Various entities within DOJ, including the FBI and the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS), have
experience collecting and analyzing crime data. As analysts have noted, the FBI’s primary crime
data collection effort, the UCR program, may not be well suited in its current form to provide
data on ORC because the crime data do not allow for analysis of ORC separate from other theft
offenses. One way to enhance the utility of NIBRS data may be for the FBI to consider adding a
data element to this system where law enforcement can tag thefts that appear to be ORC.
Alternative data collection efforts also may be able to reflect crimes attributable to ORC. For
instance, as DOJ’s primary statistical agency, BJS may be positioned to collect, analyze, and
disseminate information on ORC; BJS could collect data on business victimization to report in an
ongoing effort to understand ORC. BJS may also be able to support state, local, and tribal
governments in data collection relevant to ORC. Additionally, other entities within DOJ, such as
the National Institute of Justice (NIJ), may be positioned to sponsor private sector and academic
research and data collection on ORC.34
Policymakers may also debate whether a national survey could help inform on the prevalence of
ORC. While there is already a national data collection effort on crime victimization (the National
Crime Victimization Survey, or NCVS), the NCVS does not survey businesses.35 Currently, retail
crime data are captured through industry-administered surveys such as the NRSS. The NRSS is
methodologically limited in a number of ways, as acknowledged by the survey’s sponsors. For
instance, the survey is only distributed to research executives already on the survey’s sponsor
(NRF and LPRC) email lists. A national survey of retail victimization could help glean
information from a broader segment of businesses that may be victimized by ORC.

Author Information

Kristin Finklea

Specialist in Domestic Security

33 GAO, Organized Retail Crime: Private Sector and Law Enforcement Collaborate to Deter and Investigate Theft,
GAO-11-675, June 14, 2011.
34 NIJ has previously sponsored studies on retail business crimes; see https://nij.ojp.gov/taxonomy/term/retail-business-
crimes.
35 For more information about the NCVS, see https://bjs.ojp.gov/data-collection/ncvs.
Congressional Research Service

7

Criminal Justice Data: Organized Retail Crime

Disclaimer
This document was prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS). CRS serves as nonpartisan
shared staff to congressional committees and Members of Congress. It operates solely at the behest of and
under the direction of Congress. Information in a CRS Report should not be relied upon for purposes other
than public understanding of information that has been provided by CRS to Members of Congress in
connection with CRS’s institutional role. CRS Reports, as a work of the United States Government, are not
subject to copyright protection in the United States. Any CRS Report may be reproduced and distributed in
its entirety without permission from CRS. However, as a CRS Report may include copyrighted images or
material from a third party, you may need to obtain the permission of the copyright holder if you wish to
copy or otherwise use copyrighted material.

Congressional Research Service
R48061 · VERSION 1 · NEW
8

Download PDF

Download EPUB

Revision History

May. 2, 2024

HTML · PDF

Metadata

Topic areas

Intelligence and National Security

Report Type: CRS Report

Source: CRSReports.Congress.gov

Raw Metadata: JSON