The state of retail crime

There is a popular perception that a pandemic-fueled surge in retail crime, particularly organized crime, has made the operation of stores a much riskier proposition than it was in the pre-2020 world. This idea has been fed by news reports of several incidents of criminal gangs emptying store shelves and by retail chains themselves reporting that they have been forced to close locations because of high losses from theft. While some of these chains later retracted these claims, those statements drew far less news coverage than their original ones. So, what is the truth about retail crime levels?

A report published in March 2024 by the Brennan Center for Justice challenges the perceived rise in organized retail crime (ORC) in recent years by presenting a pattern of declining larceny offenses as reported by the FBI, shown in Figure 1. Yet the 2025 State of Retail Safety Report, a collaboration between the Loss Prevention Research Council (LPRC) at the University of Florida Innovate Hub and the security technology company Verkada, found that retail workers feel increasingly unsafe, citing rising concerns regarding aggressive behavior and verbal harassment from customers. This study will examine the intersection of national crime data and frontline worker sentiment in an attempt to reconcile the discrepancy between statistical declines in larceny and increasing concerns of workers within the retail industry.

Source: FBI Crime Data Explorer 

In the LPRC-Verkada report, respondents expressed a decline in concern about theft or robbery occurring in their workplace from 2024 to 2025, summarized in Figure 2. Even though direct concern for theft dipped from 68% to 65%, workers reported a significant rise in worry over aggressive behavior and verbal harassment. This suggests that maintaining employee well-being may now require addressing a more volatile storefront environment. Although the Brennan Center report did not address aggressive behavior, when comparing the LPRC-Verkada results with the FBI larceny offenses data, there appears to be some consistency in declining theft.

Source: LPRC-Verkada Report

A closer look at detailed reporting data provides additional context for the retail crime landscape.

First, ORC, which is defined as large-scale, coordinated theft efforts involving professional shoplifting, gift card fraud, and other crimes, must be distinguished from general larceny. The Brennan Center report showcases historical total larceny data from the FBI Crime Data Explorer, as shown in Figure 1. The graph reveals a consistent average decline year over year in recent decades. However, the FBI does not currently distinguish shoplifting and retail theft, much less ORC, from other types of larcenies.

The FBI Crime Data Explorer offers a description of the larceny data, including the location of each occurrence. Figure 3 shows the location of larceny occurrences, and among the top categories, home is the most common. This could mask retail-specific trends as home theft dominates the data used in the total larceny chart. Fortunately, this same explorer site allows a similar examination of shoplifting data. This seems a more closely aligned proxy for overall retail crime. One challenge to this dataset is that the population measured increases over time, making a direct growth comparison inaccurate. This can be overcome by examining the change in reported shoplifting occurrences along with the change in sample size.

Source: FBI Crime Data Explorer

Figure 4 illustrates the trend in reported shoplifting offenses along with the proportion of the population represented by agencies participating in reporting (which grows over time). Between 2017 and 2025, the percentage of the total population represented by the data approximately doubled, while reported shoplifting offenses increased by a factor of 2.3. After adjusting for the growing sample size, the post-2017 rise in shoplifting appears to substantially exceed what would be expected from expanded coverage alone. Improved reporting can perhaps explain some — but not all — of the observed increase. Despite declining total larcenies, as described by the Brennan Center for Justice report, the same FBI data reveals an increase in shoplifting reports per capita. It would be inappropriate to declare victory over retail crime and divert focus to other concerns at this point.

Source: FBI Crime Data Explorer

While national datasets from the FBI provide macro-level trends, industry-reported data from the National Retail Federation (NRF) offers insight into how retail operators are experiencing these changes. The NRF is the world’s largest retail trade association, and it consists of a diverse group of more than 16,000 U.S. and international retailers, as well as industry partners. In their 2025 surveys, 54% of NRF retailers reported an increase in repeat offender theft over the previous year. Cargo/supply chain theft increased for 48% of retailers and shoplifting for 46%. Two-thirds (67%) of retail respondents recorded encounters with transnational organized theft groups.

These eye-catching numbers must be interpreted with caution. It is not certain if the NRF’s polls of its members are a representative dataset of the broader retail industry. Bias can arise within a self-selected group of industry professionals. Still, the NRF represents a significant portion of the industry, and its findings support the FBI shoplifting results.

According to Christina Burton, Ph.D., a research scientist with the LPRC, there are three main parts to fighting retail crime: “Better detection, improvement to investigative techniques, and being proactive.” An accurate measure of retail crime is important to guide retailers toward appropriate measures to address the issue. Detection can be heightened by technologies in inventory and theft management. Investigative techniques have room to grow in practices, such as through data sharing of crime statistics between retailers. Having more up-to-date central resources can help identify recent trends, which aids in being proactive.

Retail owners today must consider whether they are taking the right measures to ensure the effective safety of both retail employees and inventory. The continued monitoring and gradual implementation of proper surveillance systems, coupled with legislative priority at the state and federal levels, serve as next steps in streamlining the prevention of retail crime.

Some theft prevention devices and methodologies cause retailer concern, mainly over budgeting issues and overall results. In some cases, the cost to prevent inventory loss exceeds the dollar amount of the potential loss itself. Nonetheless, there are some efficient and effective security measures for retailers to consider. Even though the return on investment for some systems is a hindrance for individual tenants, property managers can mitigate the costs by instituting advanced surveillance and issuing the cost as Common Area Maintenance (CAM) charges. This would allow the benefits to be shared and spread these general costs across all tenants.

Another hesitation regarding the implementation of crime prevention measures is the negative effect some may have on the shopping experience, resulting in weaker sales. Some prevention measures can both increase costs and reduce revenue as a side effect of managing theft. But there may be effective ways to move forward while protecting both stores’ employees and merchandise, as well as providing a pleasant shopping experience for customers. Video surveillance, on-site security, alarm systems, and license plate readers all provide affordable ways to enhance perceived and actual oversight, increasing peace of mind. By adopting these approaches, inventory can be protected without alienating customers. The goal is to make customers feel more secure rather than worried that extreme security measures are necessary.

As Burton said, “Retail criminals, especially those associated with organized retail crime groups, are actively looking at target markets.” Continued vigilance is needed.