How Is It Forfeited?

In most states and at the federal level, governments can pursue forfeiture under either civil or criminal forfeiture statutes. While the financial incentives are generally the same, civil forfeiture procedures typically offer the government an easier path via a lower standard of proof and other procedural advantages. It should therefore be no surprise that civil proceedings dominate across all levels of government.

At the federal level, civil proceedings dramatically outpace criminal ones. For the Treasury, data from 2000 to 2016—the most recent year with data available—show that just 2% of forfeitures were processed criminally, while 96% were processed through administrative forfeiture. (See Figure 19.) For the DOJ, only 18% of forfeitures from 2000 to 2023 were criminal, while 75% were administrative and 6% were civil-judicial. However, the percentage of criminal forfeitures has steadily risen over time, peaking at 51% in 2023. ¹  

Figure 19: Most Treasury forfeitures were processed administratively, 2000–2016 

Much of that increase can be attributed to destructive forfeitures, properties like weapons and ammunition that are destroyed and do not generate revenue. Among revenue-generating forfeitures, the growth in criminal forfeitures has been far more limited, with the percentage remaining around 25% since 2016. (See Figure 20.) Civil forfeiture procedures—and particularly administrative forfeiture procedures—continue to dominate DOJ forfeitures that result in proceeds. Overall, from 2000 to 2023, 71% of revenue forfeitures were administrative, while another 12% were civil-judicial. Just 17% were criminal. (See Figure 21.)

Figure 20: Among revenue-generating DOJ forfeitures, the percentage processed criminally has remained steady since 2016

Figure 21: Most DOJ revenue-generating forfeitures were processed administratively, 2000–2023 

At the state level, data regarding the proceeding type are sparse, as only three states—Arizona, Oregon, and Utah—consistently record this information. ²  Across these three states an average of 83% of forfeitures came from civil proceedings, with 15% from criminal and 2% unknown. (See Figure 22.)

Figure 22: Across three states with data, most forfeitures were civil, not criminal

Note: Data are from 2019–2023. 

In addition, Minnesota tracks whether forfeitures are initially pursued using administrative or judicial proceedings. As shown in Figure 23, only 2% of forfeitures in Minnesota were initially pursued as judicial, compared to 82% that were initially pursued as administrative. (The remaining 16% are unknown.)

Figure 23: Most of Minnesota’s forfeitures were administrative, 2019–2023