Organized retail crime (ORC), often referred to as organized retail theft, typically refers to large-scale retail theft and fraud by organized groups of professional shoplifters, or "boosters." It is an umbrella term encompassing a variety of retail crimes, including theft, gift card fraud, receipt fraud, ticket switching, and cargo theft, just to name a few. Stolen and fraudulently obtained goods may be taken not only from retailers, but from manufacturers and distributors as well. The organized crime rings resell this illegally acquired merchandise via a variety of "fencing" operations such as flea markets, swap meets, pawn shops, and online marketplaces; these goods are sold to both individual buyers as well as retailers—potentially the very retailers from where the merchandise was originally stolen. ORC differs fundamentally from shoplifting in that amateur shoplifters tend to steal merchandise for personal consumption. Boosters, on the other hand, are professional thieves who make money by stealing merchandise from retail and other venues and reselling it to fences who in turn sell the goods—through legal or illegal economic outlets—for a fraction of the retail cost. Organized retail crime exposes the United States to economic, public health, and domestic security dangers. It is a national problem, not only for retailers, but for manufacturers, consumers, taxpayers, and the states as well. According to one industry survey, about 96% of retailers surveyed in 2012 reported having been victimized by ORC in the previous 12 months. This is an increase from the about 90% that reported victimization in 2010 and the nearly 95% that reported victimization in 2011. Estimates of retail losses to ORC range from as low as $15 billion to as high as $37 billion annually. And this is the loss to retailers alone. The monetary loss, however, extends beyond the retail industry to the taxpayers and states. Consumers pay for these losses in the form of higher prices on goods, and states lose the tax revenue that would otherwise be generated from the sale of these goods by legitimate retailers. In addition to the economic impact of ORC, the theft and resale of stolen consumable or health and beauty products, such as infant formula, may pose safety risks to individuals purchasing such goods from ORC fences. This is because such products may have been repackaged, relabeled, subjected to altered expiration dates, or stored improperly before being reentered into commerce. In addition, industry experts, law enforcement, and policy makers have expressed concern about the possibility that proceeds from ORC may be used to fund terrorist activities. In particular, federal law enforcement has reputedly traced the illicit proceeds from the theft and resale of infant formula to terrorist organizations and insurgent groups, including Hamas and Hezbollah. Combating retail theft has traditionally been handled by state law enforcement under state criminal laws. Some, however, have begun to question whether state laws—which vary in the quantity of monetary losses that constitute major theft—are adequate to combat ORC. While many agree that ORC is a national problem, 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. One policy issue facing Congress is whether criminalizing organized retail crime in the U.S. Code would allow for more effective investigation and prosecution of these criminals. Another related issue that Congress may wish to consider is whether regulating resale marketplaces (online markets, in particular), to require such entities to increase information sharing with retailers and law enforcement, would strengthen investigations and prosecutions of ORC as well as decrease the prevalence of retail thieves relying on legitimate online marketplaces to fence stolen goods. This report provides an overview of organized retail crime rings, their operations, and goods targeted. It then examines the domestic impact of ORC in the arenas of the economy, public health and safety, and domestic security. The report also outlines current efforts by retailers, resale markets, and the federal government to combat ORC. It then analyzes various policy issues that Congress may wish to consider, including whether current federal resources provided for the investigation of ORC are adequate, whether to amend the U.S. Code to criminalize ORC, and whether to regulate resale marketplaces that may be utilized as fences for criminals to sell stolen goods. The concept of organized retail crime tends to be discussed in terms of criminal networks engaged in large-scale theft. Descriptions of ORC also generally entail criminals fraudulently obtaining goods in quantities beyond what would normally be intended for personal consumption; reselling these ill-gotten goods; receiving, concealing, transporting, or disposing of these goods; or coordinating individuals to commit these retail crimes. There is a lack of consensus, however, on the specific activities—particularly of boosters—that constitute ORC. On the one hand, most agree that ORC involves store theft or fraud schemes designed to obtain retail merchandise at a cost significantly below retail value or for free. However, some also include specific activities, such as cargo theft, in the definition of ORC, while others either omit certain activities or do not specify the range of ORC activities. For example, federal law enforcement agencies, such as the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), tend to constrain discussions of ORC to situations in which boosters steal merchandise from retail establishments and resell it for profit. Similarly, retail organizations have generally focused on store theft when describing the problem of ORC. One possible explanation for this focus on store theft is that, although ORC may encompass multiple activities, including store theft and cargo theft, store theft has been cited as the most common. Because retail organizations, scholars, industry experts, and law enforcement have provided varying definitions of ORC, this complicates analysts' abilities to evaluate the exact impact of ORC. Currently, ORC is not a federal crime. Issues surrounding the debate over whether it should be included in the federal criminal code are analyzed later in this report. For data collection purposes, however, Congress has defined ORC as violating a state ban against shoplifting or retail merchandise theft—if the quantities of items stolen are of the amount that would not normally be purchased for personal use or consumption—and stealing for the purposes of reselling the items or reentering them into commerce; receiving, possessing, concealing, bartering, selling, transporting, or disposing of any property that is known to have been taken in the violation outlined above; or coordinating, organizing, or recruiting persons to undertake either of the two violations outlined above. As mentioned, organized retail crime rings generally include individuals serving in one of two main capacities: boosters or fences. Generally, boosters act as professional shoplifters who steal or illegally obtain merchandise. Fences pay boosters for stolen goods and then resell them to witting or unwitting consumers and businesses. Boosters work either alone or in groups to steal goods that they will later sell to fences for about 10% to 25% of the ticket value. They often carry "fence sheets," or shopping lists provided to boosters by fences. These shopping lists itemize the goods fences desire, the amounts fences will pay for each item, and retail store locations where each item may be. In some cases, boosters may travel across state lines to target specific establishments in multiple states. Consequently, many boosters will at some point transport stolen merchandise across state lines, either when shipping stolen goods to a fence or when physically delivering merchandise to a fence after stealing it in another state. Fencing operations can be very straightforward or can involve multiple stages and a degree of operational sophistication. Most stolen merchandise is sold to a low-level fence, commonly called a "street fence." Street fences will either sell these goods directly to the public—through flea markets, swap meets, or the Internet—or will sell the merchandise to mid-level fences who run "cleaning operations." Cleaning operations remove security tags and store labels as well as repackage stolen goods so they appear as though they came directly from the manufacturer. A notable concern for public health and safety, this cleaning process may even involve changing the expiration date on perishable goods. The "clean" goods may then be sold to the public or to higher-level fences, who often operate illegitimate wholesale businesses. Through these businesses, the fences can supply merchandise to retailers, often mixing stolen merchandise with legitimate goods. The illegal activities of fences may be of concern for policy makers and federal law enforcement because—like boosters—fences' activities may cross state lines. They may, for instance, purchase stolen goods from boosters in one state and send them to another state to be cleaned; they may then sell this "clean" merchandise to illegitimate wholesalers in another state. In addition, fences selling goods via online marketplaces may ship stolen goods across state or national lines. Investigations of organized retail crime rings have uncovered a wide variety of goods targeted to be stolen and resold on the black market. One researcher has noted that CRAVED items (meaning those goods that are Concealable, Removable, Available, Valuable, Enjoyable, and Disposable) are more often targeted because of the ease with which criminals can remove these items from stores and convert them into cash or other valuables. On the one hand, some desirable—or "hot" —products, such as cigarettes and alcohol, may always be popular products for thieves. The desirability of other products may be based on their current popularity (such as new movies, video games, and music titles) or on their use in drug manufacturing activities (such as ephedrine-based cold medications and lithium batteries). In addition, the popularity of products may also be brand-specific.