Wisconsin earns an A- for its civil forfeiture laws
Standard of Proof
Higher bar to forfeit in limited cases: Weak conviction provision falls short of criminal forfeiture. It does not require conviction of the owner, only of “a person,” and the court can waive it if the owner does not contest the forfeiture or in other situations, including when the defendant has agreed to help investigators in exchange for immunity. Once the conviction provision is satisfied, property must be linked to the crime by clear and convincing evidence.
Innocent Owner Burden
Stronger protections for the innocent: The government must prove third-party owners knew about criminal activity connected to their property.
Financial Incentive
No profit incentive: All forfeiture proceeds go to fund schools, though agencies can retain up to 50% to pay for forfeiture expenses.
The letter grade reflects Wisconsin’s forfeiture laws as of May 7, 2025. When we become aware of relevant reforms, we are updating the standard of proof, innocent owner burden, and financial incentive language above, but we are not updating the letter grade.
Note: Prosecutors need only meet their standard of proof—and owners can only prove their innocence—if owners make it to a judicial hearing. See flow chart.
Recent Reforms
Recommendations
What happens after personal property is seized in Wisconsin?
Under Wisconsin law, prosecutors’, owners’, and court deadlines leading to a judicial hearing add up to 200 days, but any criminal proceedings may add to the wait. While you wait, the government has your property, but you can try to get it back while the case continues by requesting a preliminary hearing.
For research methods and limitations, see “How We Documented Civil Forfeiture Processes From Seizure to Hearing.”
State and Federal Forfeiture Proceeds, 2000–2023
At least $117 million in state and federal forfeiture revenue
| Year | Wisconsin Forfeiture Revenues | Dept. of Justice Equitable Sharing Proceeds | Treasury Equitable Sharing Proceeds | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000 | Unknown | $2,147,686 | $108,000 | $2,255,686 |
| 2001 | Unknown | $23,904,245 | $31,000 | $23,935,245 |
| 2002 | Unknown | $1,659,109 | $821,000 | $2,480,109 |
| 2003 | Unknown | $2,230,539 | $0 | $2,230,539 |
| 2004 | Unknown | $3,937,459 | $38,000 | $3,975,459 |
| 2005 | Unknown | $3,577,032 | $90,000 | $3,667,032 |
| 2006 | Unknown | $3,846,503 | $99,000 | $3,945,503 |
| 2007 | Unknown | $5,347,813 | $837,000 | $6,184,813 |
| 2008 | Unknown | $3,741,468 | $852,000 | $4,593,468 |
| 2009 | Unknown | $3,832,280 | $3,070,000 | $6,902,280 |
| 2010 | Unknown | $4,903,292 | $182,000 | $5,085,292 |
| 2011 | Unknown | $3,843,493 | $89,000 | $3,932,493 |
| 2012 | Unknown | $4,208,298 | $319,000 | $4,527,298 |
| 2013 | Unknown | $4,231,504 | $121,000 | $4,352,504 |
| 2014 | Unknown | $4,594,786 | $74,000 | $4,668,786 |
| 2015 | Unknown | $3,563,056 | $207,000 | $3,770,056 |
| 2016 | Unknown | $1,217,702 | $655,000 | $1,872,702 |
| 2017 | Unknown | $3,253,477 | $78,000 | $3,331,477 |
| 2018 | $25,789 | $3,128,744 | $22,000 | $3,176,533 |
| 2019 | $402,028 | $2,076,984 | $162,000 | $2,641,012 |
| 2020 | $1,149,468 | $1,924,047 | $66,000 | $3,139,515 |
| 2021 | $1,358,981 | $1,208,301 | $8,000 | $2,575,282 |
| 2022 | $4,163,968 | $4,052,054 | $16,000 | $8,232,022 |
| 2023 | $845,147 | $5,111,491 | $0 | $5,956,638 |
| Totals | $7,945,381 | $101,541,363 | $7,945,000 | $117,431,744 |
All revenue figures include both civil and criminal forfeitures. Revenues are not adjusted for inflation.
Federal Equitable Sharing
Since April 2018, Wisconsin has allowed state and local agencies to accept equitable sharing proceeds only if there is an associated criminal conviction, subject to exceptions. IJ’s analysis (see “Evaluating Efforts to Reform Equitable Sharing”) found that, relative to non-reform states, the reform had no immediate effect. However, the number of shared assets increased in the long run. From 2019 to 2023, Wisconsin law enforcement agencies generated nearly $15 million in equitable sharing proceeds. And on average from 2019 to 2023, 162 Wisconsin agencies, or an estimated 33% of all law enforcement agencies in the state, were certified for the program.
Forfeitures Under Wisconsin Law: Key Facts
Median Value
$2,946
From 2019 to 2023, half of Wisconsin’s currency forfeitures were worth less than $2,946.
Property Types
From 2019 to 2023, more than 85% of Wisconsin’s forfeitures were of currency.
Proceeding Types
UNKNOWN
Wisconsin does not report whether forfeitures are processed under civil or criminal forfeiture law.
Additional Findings
UNKNOWN
Agencies are required to report on their forfeitures only if they want to claim associated expenses and receive a share of proceeds. They often fail to report the full value of forfeited property, resulting in limited transparency into forfeiture activity in the state.
Forfeiture Transparency and Accountability Report Card
Tracking Seized Property
D-Statewide Forfeiture Reports
FPenalties for Failure to File a Report
FAccounting for Forfeiture Fund Spending
A †Accessibility of Forfeiture Records
BFinancial Audits of Forfeiture Accounts
F ††Wisconsin law allows agencies to retain up to 50% of forfeiture proceeds to pay for forfeiture expenses. Agencies are required to report on this spending, but the state does not require audits of agency forfeiture funds.
For full transparency and accountability grades, visit ij.org/TransparencyReportCards.
Data Notes
Agency forfeiture reports with property-level data were downloaded from the state Department of Administration’s website. All figures are in calendar years. Revenues represent the value of currency forfeited and proceeds of forfeited property sold in a year. Revenues may not reflect all forfeitures as agencies are required to report forfeitures only if they wish to receive proceeds. Additionally, revenues for 2023 may be incomplete, as agencies frequently report late. Therefore, revenues reported are likely underestimates. Only a few agencies filed reports for 2018, the first year statewide reporting was required. Equitable sharing data are from DOJ’s and Treasury’s annual forfeiture reports. Due to differences in reporting and accounting practices, figures may not match aggregate numbers produced by the state or cover the same 12-month period as the federal data. See Appendix C, available online at ij.org/report/policing-for-profit-4/appendix-c-equitable-sharing-methods/, for details of the equitable sharing reform analysis. The number of certified agencies was computed using the approved Equitable Sharing Agreement and Certification requests submitted by police, sheriff, and other local law enforcement agencies. The percentage of certified agencies was computed using that number and the total number of agencies reported in the 2018 Census of State and Local Law Enforcement Agencies.
Legal Sources
Standard of proof: Weak conviction provision does not require conviction of an owner, but only of “a person,” and a court can waive the provision if the owner fails to contest forfeiture or in other situations, including when a defendant enters into an immunity agreement with prosecutors in exchange for assisting law enforcement. After the conviction provision is satisfied, property must be linked to the crime by clear and convincing evidence.
Wis. Stat. §§ 961.55(1g), .555(2)(am), (3).
Innocent owner burden: Government.
Wis. Stat. § 961.555(5)(c), (e)–(f); cf. id. §§ 961.555(5)(b), (d), .56(1) (burden on owner with respect to establishing ownership).
Financial incentive: No financial incentive. All forfeiture proceeds go to fund schools. However, agencies can retain up to 50% of proceeds to pay for forfeiture expenses, for which they must provide an itemized report.
Wis. Const. art. X, § 2; Wis. Stat. § 961.55(5)(b), (e) (permitting seizing agencies to retain reasonable expenses).
Process: Wis. Stat. § 961.555 (forfeiture procedure); id. §§ 961.55(1k), 968.20 (preliminary hearing); id. § 806.02 (default judgment).