IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bpj/rlecon/v7y2011i1n6.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Note on the Deterrence Effects of the Forfeiture of Illegal Gains

Author

Listed:
  • Friehe Tim

    (University of Konstanz)

Abstract

This paper analyzes how the forfeiture of illegal gains impacts the deterrence of illegal acts. We show that when public authorities introduce a claim on illegal gains as part of a sanction it may, counter-intuitively, increase crime in a setting in which criminals may invest in avoidance activities to lower the probability of detection.

Suggested Citation

  • Friehe Tim, 2011. "A Note on the Deterrence Effects of the Forfeiture of Illegal Gains," Review of Law & Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 7(1), pages 118-124, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:bpj:rlecon:v:7:y:2011:i:1:n:6
    DOI: 10.2202/1555-5879.1500
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.2202/1555-5879.1500
    Download Restriction: For access to full text, subscription to the journal or payment for the individual article is required.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.2202/1555-5879.1500?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bowles, Roger & Faure, Michael & Garoupa, Nuno, 2000. "Economic analysis of the removal of illegal gains," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 20(4), pages 537-549, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Baumann, Florian & Friehe, Tim, 2015. "Status concerns as a motive for crime?," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 46-55.
    2. Murat C. Mungan & Jonathan Klick, 2014. "Forfeiture of Illegal Gains, Attempts, and Implied Risk Preferences," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 43(1), pages 137-153.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Baumann, Florian & Friehe, Tim, 2015. "Status concerns as a motive for crime?," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 46-55.
    2. Bayer, Ralph-C. & Hodler, Roland & Raschky, Paul A. & Strittmatter, Anthony, 2020. "Expropriations, property confiscations and new offshore entities: Evidence from the Panama Papers," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 171(C), pages 132-152.
    3. Roger Bowles & Chrisostomos Florackis, 2012. "Impatience, reputation and offending," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 44(2), pages 177-187, January.
    4. Friehe, Tim & Tabbach, Avraham, 2013. "Preventive enforcement," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 35(C), pages 1-12.
    5. Tabbach Avraham D., 2013. "Crime, Punishment and Tax," Review of Law & Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 9(1), pages 97-124, July.
    6. Imanpour, Maryam & Rosenkranz, Stephanie & Westbrock, Bastian & Unger, Brigitte & Ferwerda, Joras, 2019. "A microeconomic foundation for optimal money laundering policies," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(C).
    7. Graf Lambsdorff, Johann, 2010. "Deterrence and constrained enforcement: Alternative regimes to deal with bribery," Passauer Diskussionspapiere, Volkswirtschaftliche Reihe V-60-10, University of Passau, Faculty of Business and Economics.
    8. Giuseppe Dari-Mattiacci, 2009. "Negative Liability," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 38(1), pages 21-59, January.
    9. Leshem Shmuel & Tabbach Avraham D., 2012. "Commitment versus Flexibility in Enforcement Games," The B.E. Journal of Theoretical Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 12(1), pages 1-42, May.
    10. Tabbach Avraham D, 2009. "Does a Rise in Maximal Fines Increase or Decrease the Optimal Level of Deterrence?," Review of Law & Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 5(1), pages 53-73, March.
    11. Murat C. Mungan & Jonathan Klick, 2014. "Forfeiture of Illegal Gains, Attempts, and Implied Risk Preferences," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 43(1), pages 137-153.
    12. Thomas Blondiau & Carole M. Billiet & Sandra Rousseau, 2015. "Comparison of criminal and administrative penalties for environmental offenses," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 39(1), pages 11-35, February.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bpj:rlecon:v:7:y:2011:i:1:n:6. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Peter Golla (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.degruyter.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.