Official Statistics

Asset recovery statistics: financial years ending 2020 to 2025

Published 11 September 2025

Applies to England, Northern Ireland and Wales

1. About this release

The Proceeds of Crime Act (POCA 2002) enables law enforcement agencies to deprive criminals of their money, or other property connected to criminal activity, and recover the proceeds of crime. This legislative framework encompasses several asset-focussed interventions, including asset denial through restraint (restraint orders), seizures (cash, listed assets) and freezing orders (account freezing orders); and asset recovery through criminal confiscations, civil forfeitures, and civil recovery powers. Recovered criminal proceeds can subsequently be returned in compensation to victims (following criminal conviction) or reinvested for use in tackling crime through the Asset Recovery Incentivisation Scheme (ARIS).

These tools support the disruption of criminal activity and act as a supplementary mechanism or as an alternative to criminal prosecution and conviction. The Economic Crime Plan 2 further highlights the importance and practical use of asset denial and asset recovery tools in tackling economic crime.

This release contains official statistics on the value and volume of proceeds of crime restrained, seized, frozen (the ‘denial’ phase) and subsequently recovered and receipted (the ‘recovery’ phase). The release also includes statistics on:

• the value and volume of proceeds of crime by the associated criminal offence types
• the value of compensation paid to victims
• the amount of funds distributed to POCA agencies through ARIS
• the use of funds received by POCA Agencies through ARIS
• the amount awarded to projects via ARIS Top Slice Funding
• statistics on international asset recovery, including asset sharing and the denial, recovery and return of the proceeds of grand corruption

1.1 Data coverage

This release refers to data covering the financial years ending March 2020 to March 2025, for the jurisdictions of England and Wales and Northern Ireland. The release does not include data covering Scotland. The statistics are presented as nominal values, that is, not adjusted for inflation, unless stated otherwise and any comparisons to previous years do not account for inflation. Figures included in the latest statistical release supersede previous officially reported figures. Therefore, any direct comparisons of changes should not be made between the latest and previous releases of the asset recovery annual statistical bulletin.

Further information on methodology, data sources, data and statistics quality, background information on POCA legislation, and adherence to the Code of Practice for Statistics can be found in the accompanying User guide to Asset recovery statistics.

2. Executive Summary

2.1 Asset Recovery

Asset recovery reached £284.5 million in the financial year ending March 2025, driven by increased confiscation order performance.

There was £284.5 million of assets recovered from confiscation, forfeiture and civil recovery orders in the financial year ending March 2025. This represents an increase of 15% compared to financial year ending March 2024, a 31% increase compared to financial year ending March 2020 and is 7% above the 6-year median of £265.5 million.

The increase in receipts compared to the previous year has been driven primarily by increased confiscation order receipt performance. Forfeiture orders also saw a slight increase in overall performance.

Figure 1: The value of proceeds of crime recovered from confiscation order, forfeiture order, and civil recovery order receipts, from financial year ending March 2020 until financial year ending March 2025, in England and Wales and Northern Ireland

Source: JARD (confiscation order and forfeiture order receipts) and NCA (civil recovery order receipts)

Figure 1 shows that:

• confiscation order receipts drove the increase in the total amount recovered, accounting for £158 million of the £284.5 million recovered in the financial year ending March 2025 — up 23% from the previous year; this increase was predominately driven by record high recoveries from the local police force POCA agency sector
• forfeiture order receipts rose by 8% to £118.9 million in the financial year ending March 2025; this was primarily associated with an increase in receipts from low value bank forfeitures
• civil recovery order receipts remained stable at £7.5 million when compared to the previous financial year but were 19% lower compared to the 6-year median of £9.3 million

Additionally, £223.7 million of confiscation order impositions were granted in the financial year ending March 2025 - down 27% from the previous financial year’s exceptional performance (£307.7 million) but increasing by 10% when compared to the 6-year median of £202.8 million.

Note: Confiscation impositions are not included in the asset denial total, as they do not restrain or freeze assets.

2.2 Asset denial

The overall asset denial activity contracted in the financial year ending March 2025, with £783.8 million denied.

In the financial year ending March 2025, the asset recovery system denied access to £783.8 million in criminal assets through restraint and forfeiture powers, representing a decrease of 14% compared to £908.1 million in the previous financial year.

Of the £783.8 million:

• £468.8 million in restraint orders were granted — a 29% decrease from £657.8 million in the previous year; this was driven by fewer high-value orders
• £314.9 million was seized or frozen under forfeiture powers, with listed asset orders nearly doubling and account freezing orders (AFOs) contributing 70% of the value seized and frozen under forfeiture powers; both listed asset orders and AFOs reached 6-year highs in value seized and frozen

2.3 Victim compensation

Victim compensation reached a 6-year high of £47.2 million in the financial year ending March 2025.

A total of £47.2 million was paid in compensation to victims from the proceeds of crime recovered through confiscation order receipts in financial year ending March 2025, increasing by 165% from the previous financial year. This increase was primarily driven by the local police force POCA agency sector, particularly in relation to fraud-related offences.

Note: The compensation figures included within this statistical series only includes compensation paid through confiscation order receipts and does not represent the full value of compensation paid to victims across the criminal justice system. Data on wider criminal courts and criminal justice statistics, including compensation, can be found in the criminal justice statistics publication Criminal justice statistics quarterly - GOV.UK (www.gov.uk) and Criminal court statistics - GOV.UK (www.gov.uk).

2.4 Asset Recovery Incentivisation Scheme (ARIS) Funding

A total of £160.3 million of ARIS funding was distributed to POCA agencies in the financial year ending March 2025.

• this represents a 63% increase from the previous financial year; however, this was driven primarily by an exceptional, high value asset recovery case that resulted in a delayed ARIS payment; excluding this outlier, the increase was 28% (£125.6 million)
• 16 projects were awarded funding using the ARIS Top Slice budget for the financial year ending March 2025 with a total value of £13.3 million; the Top Slice grant is available to all POCA empowered agencies to invest in law enforcement capabilities and further asset recovery activities

Note: Due to the process involved in calculating, assuring and distributing funds, ARIS payments are distributed a quarter in arrears with the final 2 quarterly payment made in the following financial year.

2.5 System snapshot for the year ending March 2025

Figure 2 below provides an overview of the asset recovery system, providing summary statistics on the proceeds of crime denied, imposed, and recovered through criminal confiscation POCA powers and civil forfeiture POCA powers.

A full breakdown of the asset recovery system in the financial year ending March 2025 is presented in the commentary below.

Figure 2: Overview of the asset recovery system in the financial year ending March 2025 in England and Wales and Northern Ireland

Source: JARD

Notes:

1. Data presented in figure 2 includes the proceeds of crime restrained, imposed, seized, frozen and then recovered (through a confiscation order, forfeiture order and civil recovery order) in financial year ending March 2025.
2. Figure 2 does not represent the entire asset recovery system, the figure only includes powers that are reported on within this statistical release, there may be other mechanisms to deny or recover assets that are not captured.
3. Restraint orders are only used in certain circumstances or where dissipation of assets is likely, and not all the proceeds of crime recovered at the end of the criminal proceedings will have been subject to a restraint order earlier in the process. Users should be cautious when making comparisons between the data reported for restraint orders and confiscation orders impositions for this reason.
4. Unexplained wealth orders are represented with a dotted line since they do not classify as a denial power but rather an investigatory tool that can be used to aid civil recovery investigations.
5. The total asset recovery receipts may not equal the sum of the value of the proceeds of crime identified for each individual power for reasons that include: (a) a proportion of total asset recovery receipts will relate to restraint orders, confiscation order impositions and seizures made in previous years; (b) some proceeds of crime restrained or seized may not be recovered or released or they may be returned to the individual if their legitimacy is subsequently proven; (c) rounding.

2.6 Real terms comparison

The statistics in this section are presented in real terms, adjusted for inflation to current prices (financial year 2025 to 2026). Figures have been converted to real terms using the latest GDP deflators available at time of publication (published June 2025).

Since financial year ending March 2020, the total proceeds of crime recovered in real terms have increased by 6% from £275.9 million to £292.0 million in the financial year ending March 2025. In nominal terms, the increase is even more pronounced with an increase of 31%, from £217.6 million to £284.5 million. This indicates that not only has the nominal value of total proceeds of crime recovered grown, but the increase has also outpaced inflation resulting in real terms increase.

Figure 3: Total value of the proceeds of crime recovered, split by nominal and real terms, from financial year ending March 2020 until financial year ending March 2025, in England and Wales and Northern Ireland

Source: JARD

Further detail on real term figures can be found in table 1 of the Asset recovery statistics, financial years ending 2020 to 2025: data tables accompanying this bulletin.

3. Key background information

3.1 Data notes

Data presented on POCA powers and associated forfeiture seizures are produced using data collected on a live operational database, the Joint Asset Recovery Database (JARD). It should be noted there will be variations in the data recorded for each financial year due to revisions made in retrospection on the live administrative JARD system. Figures included in the latest statistical release supersede previous officially reported figures. Therefore, any direct comparisons of changes in asset recovery performance should not be made between the latest and previous releases of the asset recovery annual statistical bulletin. Further information on this is outlined in the accompanying User guide to Asset recovery statistics.

Caution needs to be taken when interpreting trends related to primary offence type, due to recording practices of POCA agencies, whereby money laundering is often recorded as the primary offence because the asset relates to a range of criminal conduct, including money laundering.

Statistics on the use of funds received by POCA agencies through ARIS, the amount awarded to projects via ARIS Top Slice Funding and international asset recovery are considered as experimental due to the quality of the data source from which the statistics have been produced. For further information on experimental statistics and the data source and quality issues associated with the figures included in this release, please refer to the accompanying User guide to Asset recovery statistics.

The main changes and additions to the Bulletin are presented in detail in the User guide to Asset recovery statistics.

Law enforcement agencies have been categorised into 5 different agency groups for the purpose of asset recovery reporting. The 5 groups are:

• local police forces
• regional police forces
• local authorities
• departments, agencies and public bodies
• unassigned

These agency groups are based-on conversations with agency representatives and data categorisation on JARD. A full breakdown of the list of agencies under each group can be found in table 4.2 in the accompanying User guide to Asset recovery statistics.

3.2 Additional information

The accompanying User guide to Asset recovery statistics provides the following supplementary information, which may be helpful:

• further information on POCA 2002, including definitions for different civil and criminal POCA powers
• alternative legislation which can be used for the detaining and seizure of criminal assets such as the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 and the Modern Slavery Act 2015; it should be noted that this release does not include orders under these Acts
• information on other published asset recovery statistics

4. Criminal confiscation powers

Part 2 of POCA makes provision for the confiscation of a person’s benefit from criminal conduct, following a criminal conviction. Part 2 also provides powers to restrain, seize and detain property from criminal conduct following a criminal conviction to prevent the individual from dissipating assets.

This section provides statistics on the value and volume of assets restrained, confiscation orders imposed, and the value recovered through criminal confiscation specifically:

1. restraint orders
2. confiscation order impositions
3. confiscation order receipts

4.1 Assets denied by restraint orders

Value of restraint orders

As shown in figure 4 below, the value of restraint orders in the financial year ending March 2025 has fallen to £468.8 million, down 29% compared to previous year and down 16% compared to the last 6-year median. This decreased performance is predominately due to a fall in the value of high value (£1 million +) cases in the latest financial year. When comparing just low value performance, there is negligible change compared to previous year.

Figure 4: The total value of proceeds of crime restrained through restraint orders from financial year ending March 2020 until financial year ending March 2025, in England and Wales and Northern Ireland

Source: JARD

Notes:

1. Data presented in figure 4 includes proceeds of crime that are restrained so that they cannot be sold or otherwise disposed of by the defendant (or property owner) without court approval whilst confiscation proceedings and enforcement are ongoing.
2. A restraint order is used in certain circumstances and does not reflect the overall number of confiscation orders made (impositions) or the proceeds of crime recovered at the end of criminal proceedings. Confiscation orders can be imposed without having a restraint order granted to secure assets. Users should be cautious when making comparisons between the data reported for restraint orders and confiscation orders impositions for this reason.

As can be seen in figure 4, the value of restraint orders over the last 6 years has a median value of £555 million. The highest value across the series was in the financial year ending March 2022, when restraint orders peaked at £1.7 billion. However, this peak is due to the inclusion of a single high value restraint order valued at £1 billion, which has been incorporated into this bulletin for the first time following retrospective revisions to the live administrative JARD system. This update followed changes to police records and has resulted in a marked increase in the total value of restraint orders reported for that year. Excluding that single high-value restraint order, the adjusted total for the financial year ending March 2022 would drop to £668.3 million, aligning more closely with the 6-year median.

Due to the live operational nature of police administrative systems, the data presented in this bulletin represent a snapshot in time. Any retrospective updates to the system will be reflected in future editions of this release. Consequently, figures published in each annual bulletin supersede those in previous releases, and direct comparisons of asset recovery performance between the latest and earlier bulletins should be avoided. Further details on the JARD database and data variations can be found in the User guide to Asset recovery statistics.

Volume of restraint orders

As shown in figure 5, the number of restraint orders has remained consistent since financial year ending March 2020, with 1,180 orders granted in the financial year ending March 2025, slightly higher (2%) than the 6-year median of 1,160 orders granted.

Figure 5: The volume of restraint orders granted from financial year ending March 2020 until financial year ending March 2025, in England and Wales and Northern Ireland

Source: JARD

Notes:

1. Data presented in figure 5 includes the number of restraint orders where proceeds of crime were restrained and could not be disposed of whilst confiscation proceedings and enforcement are ongoing.
2. Restraint orders do not reflect the overall number of confiscation orders made (impositions) or the proceeds of crime recovered at the end of the criminal proceedings. Confiscation orders can be imposed without having obtained a restraint order.

Restraint orders by agency sector

The value of the proceeds of crime restrained from restraint orders has decreased across all agency sectors compared to the previous financial year, apart from regional police forces whose contribution increased by 17% from £51.9 million in the previous financial year to £60.8 million in the financial year ending March 2025. A breakdown of this can be found in figure 6 below.

Figure 6: The total value of proceeds of crime restrained through restraint orders from financial year ending March 2020 until financial year ending March 2025, in England and Wales and Northern Ireland, split by agency sector

Source: JARD

Notes:

1. Values presented in figure 6 includes the proceeds of crime that are restrained and cannot be disposed of by the defendant (or property owner) without court approval whilst confiscation proceedings and enforcement are ongoing.
2. A restraint order is used in certain circumstances and does not reflect the overall number of confiscation orders made (impositions) or the proceeds of crime recovered at the end of the criminal proceedings. Confiscation orders can be imposed without having a prior restraint order. Users should be cautious when making comparisons between the data reported for restraint orders and confiscation orders impositions for this reason.

In the financial year ending March 2025, £468.8 million was restrained. Of these:

• local police forces restrained £269.8 million, accounting for 58% of the total value for restraint orders; this was a decrease of 15% compared to previous financial year (£317.1 million), but up 20% compared to the 6-year median of £224 million for local police forces, indicating that long term performance remains strong with the most recent year still outperforming typical historical levels.
• departments, agencies and public bodies restrained £110.6 million, a decrease of 47% compared to the previous year (£210 million) with a corresponding decrease in the volume of restraint orders (down 23% from 140 to 180 orders).
• regional police forces restrained £60.8 million, an increase of 17% compared to the previous year (£51.9 million) largely driven by high value money laundering cases which saw an eightfold increase compared to previous year from £3 million to £24 million.
• local authorities restrained £27.6 million, a decrease of 65% compared to the previous year (£78.1 million) primarily due to exceptional high value performance in the previous year, particularly in money laundering offence where there were 2 high value cases with a combined value of £60 million.

Over the last 6 financial years, regional police forces have contributed the largest share of the total value restrained, accounting for 38% of the total £4.3 billion restrained across the 6 financial year period. This proportion was heavily influenced by a single high value restraint order valued at £1 billion, which created a disproportionate impact for the financial year ending March 2022.

When this case is excluded from the total, the contribution by regional police forces decreases to 19% of the adjusted total of £3.3 billion restrained. In this adjusted breakdown, local police forces account for the highest proportion at 42%, followed by departments, agencies, and public bodies at 32%.

Restraint orders by primary offence type

The value of restraint orders has seen increases compared to the previous financial year for offences related to modern slavery, drugs and offences under the ‘other’ offence type group. On the other hand, fraud, money laundering and theft associated orders saw decreases in value.

The largest proportional increase in restraint orders was for modern slavery, with an increase of 297% (from £750,000 to £3 million). The largest proportional decrease was for theft, with a decrease of 90% (from £88.9 million to £8.7 million).

Drug offences

• in the financial year ending March 2025, drug-related offences accounted for £173.3 million (37%) of the total amount restrained, up 78% from £97.1 million in the previous year, and up 45% compared to the 6-year median of £121.6 million for drug offences; this is the first time drug-related offences has surpassed fraud as the main contributor for that year, accounting for 37% of value restrained
• drug-related offences continue to contribute to the majority of orders in terms of volume, accounting for 54% of the volume of restraint orders in the financial year ending March 2025
• over the 6-year period drug-related offences accounted for 52% of the total number of restraint orders (3,648 out of 6,960); of these, 72% were attributed to local police forces

Fraud offences

• in the financial year ending March 2025, fraud offences accounted for £117 million (25%) of the total amount restrained, showing a 58% decrease in value compared to £279.2 million in the previous year
• there was a corresponding decrease in volume with 285 fraud-related restraint orders for the most recent year, down from 298 orders in the previous year

Money laundering offences

• performance from money laundering related restraint orders decreased by 31%, from £126.8 million in the financial year ending March 2024 to £87.3 million in the financial year ending March 2025
• this is despite an increase in the volume of money laundering related restraint orders, which increased from 89 to 101 orders, suggesting overall lower value restrained per order

Theft offences

• restraint orders related to theft saw a 90% decrease, totalling £8.7 million (3%) in the financial year ending March 2025
• this is 68% below the 6-year median of £27.6 million, following a record high performance in the previous year that was notably influenced by a single high-value order valued at £75 million

Performance in terms of value restrained over the last 6 financial years has been driven by fraud and money laundering related offences, each contributing £1.5 billion (34%) of the total value restrained (£4.3 billion). The money laundering total includes a single high value restraint order valued at £1 billion for the financial year ending March 2022, which again disproportionately impacts the overall figure.

When this case is excluded, the adjusted total value restrained over the 6-year period is £3.3 billion, and the contribution from money laundering related offences decreases to £464 million (14%). In this adjusted breakdown, fraud remains the largest contributor at £1.5 billion (44%). Of this £775.3 million (53%) can be attributed to departments, agencies and public bodies.

Restraint orders by high value (£1 million +) and low value cases (< £1 million)

For the financial year ending March 2025, high value orders saw a decrease by 39% (from £490.5 million to £298.5 million). This is despite a 63% increase in the volume of high value orders (from 51 to 83 orders) suggesting overall lower value per order compared to previous year. The highest value order for the financial year ending March 2025 was a £30 million restraint order led by the NCA in relation to bribery and corruption.

In contrast, for that same period low value cases saw a slight increase (up 2% from £167.3 million to £170.3 million) compared to the previous year, while the volume of low value restraint orders remained relatively stable throughout the 6-year period (up 3% from the 6-year median of £164.6 million).

Figure 7: The total value of proceeds of crime restrained through restraint orders from financial year ending March 2020 until financial year ending March 2025, in England and Wales and Northern Ireland, split by high value (£1 million +) and low value cases (< £1 million)

Source: JARD

Notes:

1. Data presented in figure 7 includes proceeds of crime that are restrained so that they cannot be sold or otherwise disposed of by the defendant (or property owner) without court approval whilst confiscation proceedings and enforcement are ongoing.
2. A restraint order is used in certain circumstances and does not reflect the overall number of confiscation orders made (impositions) or the proceeds of crime recovered at the end of criminal proceedings. Confiscation orders can be imposed without having a restraint order granted to secure assets. Users should be cautious when making comparisons between the data reported for restraint orders and confiscation orders impositions for this reason.

It should be noted that the financial year ending March 2022 saw a substantial increase in high value restraint orders, up 230% from £453 million to £1.5 billion. However, this increase was primarily due to a single high value restraint order in relation to money laundering obtained by London Regional Asset Recovery Team (RART) valued at £1 billion, accounting for 67% of the value of restraint orders for that year and is the highest value restraint order granted over the last 6 financial years.

4.2 Confiscation order impositions

Confiscation order impositions take place before the enforcement and receipts phase as they are the point at which the court places a requirement to pay a confiscation order on an offender. Confiscation order impositions can highlight the success of agencies at identifying and pursuing cases where assets can be confiscated, and at obtaining confiscation orders against a defendant.

Value of confiscation order impositions

The value of confiscation order impositions has decreased compared to the previous financial year, with £223.7 million of confiscation orders imposed for the financial year ending March 2025. This is a decrease of 27% from £307.7 million in the previous financial year, but also an increase of 10% compared to the 6-year median of £202.8 million indicating performance has been strong despite the decline from last year’s peak.

Figure 8: The value of proceeds of crime imposed from confiscation orders from financial year ending March 2020 until financial year ending March 2025, in England and Wales and Northern Ireland

Source: JARD

Notes:

1. Values presented in figure 8 include the proceeds of crime which the defendant is ordered to pay back to the court. It does not reflect the proceeds of crime which are subsequently recovered through enforcement action and payments.

The decrease in confiscation impositions in the financial year ending March 2025, can be attributed to a single high value money laundering related imposition of £101.5 million, which accounted for almost half of the total confiscation order for that year. A more detailed breakdown can be found in the high value section later in this commentary.

The 6-year low in the financial year ending March 2021 could be linked to the restrictions introduced in the COVID-19 pandemic which affected law enforcement, criminal justice, and asset recovery systems.

Volume of confiscation order impositions

As seen in figure 9 the volume of confiscation order impositions experienced a large drop in financial year ending March 2021, but has steadily been increasing since then. In financial year ending March 2025, 3,422 confiscation order impositions were granted. This has increased by 9% from 3,153 in the previous financial year.

Figure 9: The volume of confiscation orders imposed from financial year ending March 2020 until financial year ending March 2025, in England and Wales and Northern Ireland

Source: JARD

Notes:

1. Volumes presented in figure 9 include the proceeds of crime which the defendant is ordered to pay back to the court. It does not reflect the proceeds of crime which are subsequently recovered through enforcement action and payments.

Confiscation order impositions by agency sector

Figure 10 shows that for the previous 5 financial years, the main contributor for value imposed from confiscation orders has been departments, agencies and public bodies. However, for the financial year ending March 2025, local police have surpassed departments, agencies and public bodies as the main contributor in terms of value imposed, with departments, agencies and public bodies dropping to a 6-year low.

Figure 10: The value of proceeds of crime imposed from confiscation orders from financial year ending March 2020 until financial year ending March 2025, in England and Wales and Northern, split by agency sector

Source: JARD

Notes:

1. Values presented in figure 10 includes the proceeds of crime which the defendant is ordered to pay back to the court. It does not reflect the proceeds of crime which are subsequently recovered through enforcement action and payments.

Over the last 6 financial years, local police forces have contributed 34% of the total £1.3 billion imposed across the 6 financial year period. In terms of volume of orders imposed, local police have historically had the highest number of orders compared to other agency sectors for all financial years with 75% of total orders over the last 6 financial years being led by local police forces.

For the financial year ending March 2025, local police forces have contributed 63% (£141 million) of the total value of impositions, rising to a 6-year high with more than double the value imposed compared to the previous year and surpassing departments, agencies and public bodies as the main contributor for that year.

Departments, agencies and public bodies have historically been the main contributor in terms of value imposed. Over the last 6 financial years, they have contributed 43% of the total £1.3 billion imposed across the 6 financial year period.

For the financial year ending March 2025, departments, agencies and public bodies have contributed 12% (£25.8 million) of the total value of impositions, with a 84% decrease compared to the previous year, dropping to a 6-year low.

Confiscation order impositions by primary offence type

The value of confiscation order impositions has seen increases for both drugs and theft offences, with both offence types reaching 6-year highs of £91.6 million and £22 million respectively. Overall, performance across the last 6 financial years has been driven by fraud-related confiscation order impositions, contributing £389.7 million, accounting for 31% of the total value imposed (£1.3 billion).

Drug offences

• for the financial year ending March 2025, drug-related offences contributed the majority of impositions at 41% (£91.6 million) of the total value of confiscation orders imposed (£223.7 million); drug-related offences also contributed to the majority of impositions in terms of volume, with 2,457 orders accounting for 72% of total confiscation orders imposed

Fraud offences

• in the financial year ending March 2025 there were 488 fraud-related confiscation order impositions, which accounted for £53.5 million of the total value imposed, a substantive increase (58%) compared to £34 million in the previous financial year and up 9% compared to the 6-year median
• although fraud contributed the majority of the impositions over the last 6 financial years, for the most recent year only 24% of the total value imposed was in relation to fraud

Money laundering offences

• in the financial year ending March 2025, confiscation order impositions relating to money laundering also saw a substantive decrease in values imposed, down 73% from £170.2 million to £45.2 million, but remained on par with the 6-year median of £45.6 million

Theft offences

• theft-related offences saw a more than sixfold increase, from £3.1 million to £22 million for the financial year ending March 2025
• this increase was mainly attributed to 2 high value theft cases with a combined value of £15.7 million recovered by local police

Over the last 6 financial years, fraud-related impositions had the highest contribution in terms of value imposed at 31% (£389.7 million) of the total value imposed over the last 6 years (£1.3 billion). This was followed by money laundering related impositions with the second highest contribution at 27% (£344.6 million). However, money laundering related impositions had the highest value per order imposed over the last 6 years compared to other offence types, at £436,000 per order. In terms of volume, drug-related offences was the most common offence type, accounting for 66% (12,483) of the 18,877 confiscation order imposed across the last 6 financial years.

Confiscation order impositions by high value (£1 million +) and low value cases (< £1 million)

As shown in figure 11, the financial year ending March 2025 saw a 52% decrease in high value impositions, from £205.9 million to £99.6 million. This was primarily due to exceptional performance in the previous year with the largest high value imposition valued at £101.5 million.

When assessing low value impositions, performance has increased by 22% compared to previous year (from £101.8 million to £124.2 million), reaching a 6-year high for low value imposition as well as a corresponding increase in volume of impositions compared to previous year (up 9% from 3130 to 3397 orders imposed). This suggests that there is a consistent and improving baseline delivery.

Figure 11: The value of proceeds of crime imposed from confiscation orders from financial year ending March 2020 until financial year ending March 2025, in England and Wales and Northern Ireland, split by high value (£1 million +) and low value cases (< £1 million)

Source: JARD

Notes:

1. Values presented in figure 11 include the proceeds of crime which the defendant is ordered to pay back to the court. It does not reflect the proceeds of crime which are subsequently recovered through enforcement action and payments.

Overall, across the 6-year period, departments, agencies and public bodies have been the main contributor for high value impositions, encompassing 65% (£451.8 million) of the total high value impositions (£691.5 million). For low value impositions, local police have been the main contributor, encompassing 56% of (£313.7 million) of the total low value impositions (£564.2 million) across the 6-year period.

4.3 Assets recovered by confiscation order receipts

There was £158 million recovered from confiscation order receipts in the financial year ending March 2025, an increase of 23% from £128.5 million recovered in the previous financial year and an increase of 9% compared to the 6-year median of £145.4 million. The increase can be attributed to record high receipts from local police force led confiscation orders which saw the highest amount of confiscation order receipts recorded in the last 6 financial years.

Figure 12: The value of confiscation order receipts from financial year ending March 2020 until financial year ending March 2025, in England and Wales and Northern Ireland

Source: JARD

Notes:

1. Figure 12 shows the value of the proceeds of crime recovered (paid against confiscation order impositions) from the defendant following the end of criminal proceedings. It includes payments received from the defendant, or through successful enforcement activity, on any outstanding confiscation orders which means it can include payments linked to a confiscation order imposition in the current financial year and previous ones.

As shown in figure 12, there was a decline in the value of confiscation order receipts between the financial years ending March 2020 and March 2021. The introduction of COVID-19 restrictions in the financial year ending March 2021 had a negative effect on the entire criminal justice system, including investigation, prosecution and conviction capacity and capability, impacting confiscation order impositions and confiscation order receipts for that period.

Following the low in the financial year ending March 2021, confiscation order receipts recovered and increased substantially in the financial year ending March 2022, before reaching a record high in the financial year ending March 2023 due to an uptake in high value cases worth £94.5 million. Performance dropped again for the financial year ending March 2024 due to fewer high value cases, before recovering in the latest financial year with a record high performance from local police forces.

Confiscation order receipts’ value by agency sector

In the financial year ending March 2025, local police forces contributed £91.3 million in confiscation order receipts, accounting for 58% of the total proceeds of crime recovered from confiscation order receipts, with their contribution increasing by 39% on the previous financial year (£65.7 million). In contrast, performance from departments, agencies and public bodies has fallen by 12% from £28.8 million to £25.5 million, reaching a 6-year low.

Figure 13: The value of confiscation order receipts from financial year ending March 2020 until financial year ending March 2025, in England and Wales and Northern Ireland, by agency sector

Source: JARD

Notes:

1. Figure 13 shows the value of the proceeds of crime recovered (paid against confiscation order impositions) from the defendant following the end of criminal proceedings. It includes payments received from the defendant, or through successful enforcement activity, on any outstanding confiscation orders which means it can include payments linked to a confiscation order imposition in the current financial year and previous ones.

Over the last 6 financial years, local police forces have contributed the largest share of the total value recovered, accounting for 44% of the total £854.7 million recovered across the 6 financial year period. The total receipts recovered by local police forces across the 6 financial year period were predominately from drug-related cases (£188 million).

Departments, agencies and public bodies have seen volatile performance over the 6-year period, with performance spiking in the financial years ending March 2022 and 2023 primarily due to influx in high value cases. Performance fell in subsequent years as the number of high value cases also decreased.

In financial years ending March 2022 and March 2023, departments, agencies and public bodies recovered £44.1 million and £94.5 million respectively in high value receipts which was a substantial increase compared to previous financial years. Since then, the number of high value orders have decreased for departments, agencies and public bodies which has seen a corresponding decrease in value of confiscation order receipts, with high value receipts down 84% from £94.5 million to £15.3 million in financial year ending March 2024.

Regional police forces in the financial year ending March 2025 recovered £26.6 million, increasing by 25% compared to previous year, reaching the highest value recovered since the peak of £25.2 million in financial year ending March 2020. This was primarily driven by drug-related cases which encompassed 59% of value recovered and also saw a corresponding increase by 77% compared to previous year, from £8.9 million to £15.8 million.

The value of confiscation order receipts recovered by local authorities has decreased, down 12% from £12 million recovered in the financial year ending March 2024 to £10.5 million in the latest financial year.

Data note on confiscation order receipts

The measure for the volume of confiscation orders in which the proceeds of crime have been recovered is not reported in this release due to limitations with JARD data. Further information on this is available in the User guide to Asset recovery statistics.

Confiscation order receipts’ value by primary offence type

The value of confiscation order receipts has increased across the majority of offence types (except for offences categorised as ‘other’) compared to the previous financial year, with drug-related receipts reaching a 6-year high.

Drug offences

• drug-related confiscation order receipts recovered £67.7 million in financial year ending March 2025, an increase of 8% compared to the previous year, reaching a 6-year high
• drug-related confiscation order receipts were the main contributor amongst the offence types and accounted for 43% of total confiscation order receipts recovered in financial year ending March 2025; this is despite an 86% decrease in the amount recovered from high value cases, suggesting broader and more consistent outcomes with less reliance on exceptional cases
• local police forces contributed the majority of drug-related receipts during this period, being responsible for 69% (£47.1 million) of the receipts recovered relating to drug offences

Fraud offences

• fraud-related confiscation receipts recovered £50.4 million in the most recent year, a 47% increase compared to the previous year, recovering from the 6-year record low in the previous year
• this increase is due to a combination of increased high value receipts (more than threefold increase from £6.5 million to £20.4 million) and improved performance from local police (57% increase from £12.5 million to £19.6 million)

Theft offences

• theft-related confiscation receipts saw a substantial increase (up 250% from £5.3 million to £18.5 million) compared to previous year, reaching a 6-year record high
• this increase is due to a corresponding increase in high value theft cases (more than sixfold increase from £2.2 million to £13.8 million), encompassing 75% of total theft-related receipts

Money laundering offences

• money laundering related confiscation receipts saw a 24% decrease compared to the previous year (down from £12.7 million to £9.6 million)
• this decrease is primarily from local authorities which saw a 93% decrease in money laundering related receipts compared to the previous year’s peak (down from £4.7 million to £306,000)

Confiscation order receipts’ value by high value (£1 million +) and low value cases (< £1 million)

As shown in figure 14, the financial year ending March 2025 saw a 22% increase in high value receipts, from £29.6 million to £36.1 million. Majority of the high value cases were led by Lancashire Police who contributed 60% (£21.7 million) of the total high value receipts for that period.

When assessing low value impositions, performance has increased by 23% compared to previous year (from £98.9 million to £121.9 million), with local police being the main driver for low value performance, contributing 56% (£67.7 million) of the total low value receipts.

Figure 14: The value of confiscation order receipts from financial year ending March 2020 until financial year ending March 2025, in England and Wales and Northern Ireland, split by high value (£1 million +) and low value cases (< £1 million)

Source: JARD

Notes:

1. Figure 14 shows the value of the proceeds of crime recovered (paid against confiscation order impositions) from the defendant following the end of criminal proceedings. It includes payments received from the defendant, or through successful enforcement activity, on any outstanding confiscation orders which means it can include payments linked to a confiscation order imposition in the current financial year and previous ones.

Overall, across the 6-year period, departments, agencies and public bodies have been the main contributor for high value confiscation order receipts, encompassing 75% (£177.8 million) of the total high value receipts (£237.4 million). For low value impositions, local police have been the main contributor, encompassing 54% of (£335.1 million) of the total low value receipts (£617.3 million) across the 6-year period.

5. Civil forfeiture powers

Part 5 of POCA makes provisions for the forfeiture of certain assets (cash, monies in relevant accounts, listed assets or cryptoassets) that are determined to be, or to represent property obtained through, or intended for use in unlawful conduct, without a criminal conviction. If the relevant statutory conditions are satisfied the Magistrates’ Court will authorise the seizure and forfeiture of assets. The detention and forfeiture can also occur under other legislation including, but not limited to, the Drugs Trafficking Act 1994, Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984, and Anti-Terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001. Under POCA legislation the denial of assets is mandatory before assets can be forfeited.

This section provides a summary of the statistics on the value and volume of the proceeds of crime seized, frozen and recovered (forfeited) under different legislation, including POCA, as follows:

1. the value and volume of proceeds of crime seized and frozen through cash seizures, account freezing orders and listed asset seizures
2. the value and volume of proceeds of crime recovered from forfeiture order receipts and through cash seizures, account freezing orders and listed asset seizures

Users should be aware that the methodology for collecting cash seizure data from the police JARD system has been updated to include cases that were previous not captured. This new methodology has been backdated for previous years so users should avoid any direct comparisons between this release and previous releases of the bulletin. Further details can be found in the User guide to Asset recovery statistics.

5.1 Assets denied by seizures

Value of seizures

In the financial year ending March 2025, £314.9 million was seized and frozen under all seizure sub-types, an increase of 26% from the previous financial year. Of these:

• £221.6 million (70%) was from AFOs, compared to £166.2 million (66% of £250.3 million) in the previous financial year
• £78.2 million (25%) was from cash seizures, compared to £76.5 million (31%) in the previous financial year
• £15.1 million (5%) was from listed assets, compared to £7.6 million (3%) in the previous financial year

Since the financial year ending March 2020 a total of £1.6 billion has been seized and frozen using seizure powers. With the exception of the financial year ending March 2021, AFOs have consistently contributed the highest value of seizures of all subtypes within the reporting period.

Figure 15: The value of proceeds of crime seized and frozen under all seizure sub-types from financial year ending March 2020 until financial year ending March 2025, in England and Wales and Northern Ireland

Source: JARD

Notes:

1. Data presented in figure 15 shows the value of assets or proceeds of crime seized (cash, listed assets) and frozen (AFOs) that cannot be accessed by the respondent whilst the investigation is undertaken (subject to exclusions, for example, to carry on any trade, business, profession, and for reasonable living expenses). It does not reflect the proceeds of crime which are recovered at the end of the investigation.
2. These powers can only be used where assets or proceeds of crime are worth more than the prescribed minimum amount, currently set at £1,000.

As shown in figure 15, the total assets seized and frozen reached a 6-year high in the most recent financial year ending March 2025 at £314.9 million, this was mostly driven by AFO seizures which accounted for 70% (£221.6 million) of the total seized value. This peak was driven by 30 high value AFOs worth £107.1 million, which accounted for 34% of the total assets seized and frozen.

Cash seizures saw a substantial decrease in the financial year ending March 2022, down 50% from £168.6 million in the financial year ending March 2021 to £84.2 million in the financial year ending March 2022. However, since then performance has gradually stabilised, with the most recent year figure of £78.2 million only slightly below the 6-year median of £81.1 million.

Listed asset seizures has seen a gradual increase in performance since the financial year ending March 2021, with performance rising each subsequent year with the exception of the financial year ending March 2024 which saw performance fall by 15% (from £8.9 million to £7.6 million) before seeing a substantial increase for the most recent year, up by almost twofold from £7.6 million to £15.1 million and reaching a 6-year high.

Volume of seizures

There were 6,479 seizures processed in the financial year ending March 2025, increasing by 7% compared to 6,051 processed in the previous financial year. The seizure sub-type volume breakdown in the financial year ending March 2025 is:

• 4,050 orders (63%) were associated with cash seizures, compared to 4,033 orders (67%) in the previous financial year
• 2,182 orders (34%) were associated with AFOs, compared to 1,847 orders (31%) in the previous financial year
• 247 orders (4%) were associated with listed asset orders, compared to 171 orders (3%) in the previous financial year

Figure 16: The volume of proceeds of crime seized under all seizure sub-types from the financial year ending March 2020 until financial year ending March 2025, in England and Wales and Northern Ireland

Source: JARD

Notes:

1. Data presented in figure 16 shows the volume of assets or proceeds of crime seized (cash, listed assets) and frozen (AFOs) that cannot be accessed by the respondent whilst the investigation is undertaken (subject to exclusions, for example, to carry on any trade, business, profession, and for reasonable living expenses). It does not reflect the proceeds of crime which are recovered at the end of the investigation.
2. These powers can only be used where assets or proceeds of crime are worth more than the prescribed minimum amount currently set at £1,000.

As shown in figure 16, the total number of seizures increased until the financial year ending March 2021, hitting a 6-year peak of 6,588 before dropping to 5,201 in the financial year ending March 2022, which is the lowest volume granted within the last 6 financial years. However, since then seizures have steadily been increasing again with seizures obtained in the financial year ending March 2025 being 7% higher than last financial year and 12% higher than the median number of total seizures for the previous 6 financial years (5,789 orders).

Cash seizures have remained the most prominent seizure sub-type over the last 6 financial years. The number of cash seizures peaked in the financial year ending March 2021 (5,216 seizures), before dropping to a 6-year low in the financial year ending March 2023. Since then, cash seizure volumes have seen only slight increases with the latest financial year seeing an increase from 4,033 to 4,050 cases.

AFOs have seen a continuous increase in the volume of cases since the financial year ending March 2022 with 2,182 being processed in the financial year ending March 2025, an increase of 18% from last year (1,847 orders) and reaching a 6-year high.

There is a relatively low volume of listed assets processed yearly with an average of 154 per financial year. However, in the financial year ending March 2025 there were 247 listed asset seizures, which is 60% higher than the average over the last 6 reported financial years.

Seizures by agency sector

From the financial years ending March 2021 to March 2023, local police forces were the most prominent agency sector for seizures. From the financial year ending March 2024 onwards, departments, agencies and public bodies have become the most prominent agency sector for seizures, in terms of value:

• departments, agencies and public bodies seized and froze £147.1 million (47%) of the £314.9 million seized in the latest financial year, up 20% from the previous financial year; this increase is primarily driven by a 43% increase (from £62 million to £88.6 million) in the value of high value cases. In terms of volume, the most prominent for departments, agencies and public bodies seizures in the financial year ending March 2025 were AFOs with 465 (49%) being granted of the total 954 denials
• local police seized and froze £132.3 million (42%) of the £314.9 million seized in the latest financial year, up 22% from the previous financial year; local police forces remain the most prominent agency sector in terms of volume, over the last 6 financial years accounting for 73% (25,823) seizure within that period. In terms of volume, the most prominent for local police forces was drug-related seizures, which accounted for 51% (2,423 seizures) of their total seizures volume in the latest financial year
• local authorities saw a substantial increase in value seized and frozen for the financial year ending March 2025 (up 71% from £666,000 in the previous year to £1.1 million in the most recent year), reaching a 6-year high

Seizures by primary offence type

Money laundering offences

• seizures associated with money laundering offences in financial year ending March 2025 accounted for the largest value of all seizures, while drug-related offences accounted for the largest volume of all seizures
• in the financial year ending March 2025, the value of all seizures associated with money laundering related offences were £184.7 million, accounting for 59% of the total value, whilst increasing by 25% compared to the previous financial year (£147.5 million); this represents a 6-year high and was primarily driven by high value cases which saw a 64% increase from £40.7 million to £66.8 million
• money laundering-related offences have seized £853.6 million (53%) of the £1.6 billion seized over the last 6 financial years, being the most prominent offence type for all seizure sub-types over this period
• it should be noted that this trend is partially attributed to recording practises as POCA agencies often default to recording seizure as money laundering as a catch-all for illicit finances or because the assets relate to a range of criminal conduct including money laundering; this means caution needs to be taken when interpreting trends related to primary offence type

Fraud offences

• fraud-related criminal offences contributed £67.1 million (21%) through seizures in the financial year ending March 2025, with the majority of the seizures being AFOs (89%)
• fraud-related criminal offences have historically been driven by departments, agencies and public bodies, and this trend continues for the latest financial year with departments, agencies and public bodies contributing £56.3 million (84%) of the total fraud-related seizures

Drug offences

• seizures associated with drug-related offences has been steadily declining since its last peak in the financial year ending March 2021 at £75.3 million, but the recent financial year has seen drug-related seizures recover slightly with a 14% increase from £34.2 million to £39.1 million
• in terms of volume, drug-related seizures have historically contributed the highest volume of seizures, having contributed 49% (17,434 seizure cases) of the total seizures volume (35,232 total seizure cases) over the 6-year period

Seizures by high value (£1 million +) and low value cases (< £1 million)

Account Freezing Orders

As shown in figure 17, the financial year ending March 2025 saw a 74% increase in high value AFOs, from £61.7 million to £107.1 million. The majority of the high value orders were led by departments, agencies and public bodies who contributed 78% (£83.1 million) of the total high value orders for that period.

Figure 17: The value of account freezing orders from financial year ending March 2020 until financial year ending March 2025, in England and Wales and Northern Ireland, split by high value (£1 million +) and low value cases (< £1 million)

Source: JARD

Notes:

1. Data presented in figure 17 shows the value of assets or proceeds of crime frozen via account freezing orders that cannot be accessed by the respondent whilst the investigation is undertaken (subject to exclusions, for example, to carry on any trade, business, profession, and for reasonable living expenses). It does not reflect the proceeds of crime which are recovered at the end of the investigation.
2. This power can only be used where assets or proceeds of crime are worth more than the prescribed minimum amount, currently set at £1,000.

When assessing low value AFOs, performance has increased by 10% compared to previous year (from £104.6 million to £114.5 million), reaching a 6-year high. This was also primarily driven by local police, contributing 51% (£57.9 million) of the total low value receipts for the most recent financial year.

Overall, across the 6-year period, departments, agencies and public bodies have been the main contributor for high value orders, encompassing 69% (£360.3 million) of the total orders (£522.7 million). For low value AFOs, local police have again been the main contributor, encompassing 51% of (£245.5 million) of the total low value AFOs (£483.9 million) across the 6-year period.

Cash Seizures

As shown in figure 18, historically cash seizures have been driven primarily by low value seizures, with the most recent year continuing this trend. For the financial year ending March 2025 there was an 8% decrease in high value receipts, from £4.4 million to £4.1 million. The majority of the high value cases were led by departments, agencies and public bodies who contributed 74% (£3 million) of the total high value seizures for that period.

Figure 18: The value of cash seizures from financial year ending March 2020 until financial year ending March 2025, in England and Wales and Northern Ireland, split by high value (£1 million +) and low value cases (< £1 million)

Source: JARD

Notes:

1. Data presented in figure 18 shows the value of assets or proceeds of crime seized via cash seizures that cannot be accessed by the respondent whilst the investigation is undertaken (subject to exclusions, for example, to carry on any trade, business, profession, and for reasonable living expenses). It does not reflect the proceeds of crime which are recovered at the end of the investigation.
2. This power can only be used where assets or proceeds of crime are worth more than the prescribed minimum amount, currently set at £1,000.

When assessing low value cash seizures, performance has increased by 3% compared to previous year (from £72.1 million to £74.1 million). This was also primarily driven by local police, contributing 70% (£51.8 million) of the total low value receipts. Overall low value seizures encompassed 95% of total cash seizures.

Across the 6-year period, departments, agencies and public bodies have been the main contributor for high value cash seizures, encompassing 55% (£22.5 million) of the total high value cash seizures (£41.1 million). For low value cash seizures, local police have been the main contributor, encompassing 61% (£321 million) of the total low value seizures (£528.1 million) across the 6-year period, with over half of these low value seizures being drug-related offences.

Listed Asset Seizures

As shown in figure 19, the financial year ending March 2025 saw a substantial increase in high value listed asset seizures, up 354% from £1.3 million to £5.7 million and reaching a 6-year high. The majority of the high value cases were led by departments, agencies and public bodies who contributed 45% (£2.6 million) of the total high value seizures for that period.

Figure 19: The value of listed asset seizures from financial year ending March 2020 until financial year ending March 2025, in England and Wales and Northern Ireland, split by high value (£1 million +) and low value cases (< £1 million)

Source: JARD

Notes:

1. Data presented in figure 19 shows the value of assets or proceeds of crime seized via listed asset seizures that cannot be accessed by the respondent whilst the investigation is undertaken (subject to exclusions, for example, to carry on any trade, business, profession, and for reasonable living expenses). It does not reflect the proceeds of crime which are recovered at the end of the investigation.
2. This power can only be used where assets or proceeds of crime are worth more than the prescribed minimum amount, currently set at £1,000.

For low value listed asset seizures, there has been a corresponding increase in both the value seized (up 49% from £6.3 million to £9.4 million) and volume of cases (up 41% from 176 to 249 cases). Both areas have reached a new 6-year high. This was also primarily driven by departments, agencies and public bodies, contributing 52% (£4.9 million) of the total low value listed asset seizures.

Overall, across the 6-year period, departments, agencies and public bodies have been the main contributor for high value listed asset seizures, encompassing 75% (£9.1 million) of the total high value listed asset seizures (£12.3 million). For low value seizures, local police have again been the main contributor, encompassing 49% of (£16.1 million) of the total low value seizures (£32.9 million) across the 6-year period, this is followed closely by departments, agencies and public bodies encompassing 39% of (£12.9 million) of the total low value seizures.

5.2 Assets recovered by forfeiture order receipts

Value of forfeiture order receipts

In the financial year ending March 2025, £118.9 million was recovered under forfeiture orders, which is an increase of 8% from £110.5 million in the previous financial year.

Of these:

• £51.6 million (43%) was from cash forfeitures, compared to £62.6 million (57%) in the previous financial year
• £62.6 million (53%) was from bank forfeitures compared to £44.8 million (41%) the previous year
• £4.6 million (4%) was recovered from listed assets compared to £2.8 million (3%) the previous year; this is the highest value recovered under listed assets over the 6 financial year period with an 65% increase compared to the previous year

Since the financial year ending March 2020 a total of £705.2 million has been recovered using forfeiture powers. Between the financial years ending March 2020 and March 2021, forfeiture recoveries were mainly driven by cash forfeitures. Between financial years ending March 2022 and 2023, bank forfeitures surpassed cash forfeitures as the main drivers of forfeiture recoveries, after which performance fluctuated with cash forfeitures taking the lead for the financial year ending March 2024, before returning to bank forfeitures for the most recent financial year.

Figure 20: The value of forfeiture order receipts (total and sub-types) from the financial year ending March 2020 until financial year ending March 2025, in England and Wales and Northern Ireland

Source: JARD

Notes:

1. Data presented in figure 20 shows the proceeds of crime recovered at the end of an investigation from the respondent. It includes the proceeds of crime recovered on any outstanding forfeiture order which means the proceeds recovered could be linked to a seizure from a previous financial year.
2. These powers can only be used where assets or the proceeds of crime are worth more than the prescribed minimum amount of £1,000.
3. Note that the total sum for forfeiture order receipts by sub-type includes seizures where the sub-type was not recorded or specified on JARD.
4. Note that the value captured for forfeiture order receipts is based on the original order amount due to data entry issues on JARD.

As shown in figure 20, from the financial year ending March 2020 the value of forfeiture order receipts increased sharply to a peak in March 2022 (£194.8 million recovered). Despite the value of forfeiture order receipts experiencing a sharp decline to £100.8 million in the financial year ending March 2023, the value of receipts had begun steadily rise to £118.9 million in the latest financial year.

Cash forfeitures saw a 18% decrease in performance, due to a corresponding decrease in high value cash forfeitures (down 53% from £6.2 million to £2.9 million). In contrast, bank forfeitures saw a 40% increase in value which can be attributed to an increase in high value bank forfeitures (up 166% from £4.5 million to £12.1 million), and also an increase in volume of low value cases (up 24% from 879 to 1086 cases).

Volume of forfeiture orders

There were 4,128 forfeiture orders granted in the financial year ending March 2025, representing an increase of 10% from 3,768 in the previous financial year.

Of these:

• 2,925 orders (71%) were cash forfeitures, compared to 2,794 orders (74%) in the previous financial year
• 1,090 orders (26%) were bank forfeitures, compared to 883 (23%) in the previous financial year
• 113 orders (3%) were listed asset orders, compared to 81 (2%) in the previous financial year

Figure 21: The volumes of forfeiture order receipts by sub-types from the financial year ending March 2020 until financial year ending March 2025, in England and Wales and Northern Ireland

Source: JARD

Notes:

1. Data presented in figure 21 shows volume of the proceeds of crime recovered at the end of an investigation from the respondent. It includes the proceeds of crime recovered on any outstanding forfeiture order which means the proceeds recovered could be linked to a seizure from a previous financial year.
2. These powers can only be used where assets or the proceeds of crime are worth more than the prescribed minimum amount currently set at £1,000.
3. Note that the total sum for forfeiture order receipts by sub-type includes seizures where the sub-type was not recorded or specified on JARD.

As figure 21 shows, there has been a general increase in the number of forfeiture orders over the last 6 financial years, with some fluctuation including a spike in the financial year ending March 2022 (3,796 forfeiture orders). Volumes in the latest financial year were up 10% from the previous financial year and reached a 6-year high at 4,128 orders.

Cash forfeitures have remained the most prominent forfeiture order sub-type over the last 6 financial years. Compared to the previous year, the number of cash forfeitures orders granted have risen by 5% (from 2,794 to 2,925 orders) and encompassed 71% of total volume of forfeiture orders for the latest year.

Additionally, there has been increase in the number of bank account forfeiture orders, up 23% compared to the previous year from 883 to 1,090 orders, reaching a 6-year high.

Listed assets also saw an increase in volume of orders, up 40% from 81 to 113 orders, also reaching a 6-year high.

Forfeiture order receipts’ value by agency sector

In the financial year ending March 2025, forfeiture order receipts from local police forces totalled £78 million, accounting for 66% of total value of forfeiture order receipts:

• local police forces also accounted for the highest volume of orders, with 3,180 forfeiture orders (77%) associated with local police forces and achieving a 6-year high; of these, 2,345 were cash forfeiture orders, representing a 9% increase from the previous financial year
• departments, agencies and public bodies contributed £31.8 million (27%) in financial year ending March 2025, down 12% compared to previous year and down 12% compared to the 6-year median of £36.2 million; bank account forfeitures was the most common forfeiture sub-type, representing 67% of forfeitures for departments, agencies and public bodies
• regional police forces contributed £8.8 million (7%) to forfeiture order receipts in the latest financial year, falling by 37% compared to the previous year’s peak of £14 million
• local authorities contributed £326,000 in the latest financial year, falling by 28% compared to the previous year’s peak of £454,000, but up 24% compared to the 6-year median of £262,000

Forfeiture order receipts by primary offence type

Money laundering offences

• money laundering related offences have remained the most prominent primary offence type for forfeiture orders over the last 6 financial years, accounting for £411.4 million (58%) of the £705.2 million total value of forfeiture order receipts over the 6 financial-year period
• in the financial year ending March 2025, money laundering related offences contributed £70.1 million, a 13% increase compared to the previous financial year and is driven by local police forces who contributed £47.7 million (68%) of receipts
• this is on trend across the 6-year period where local police forces were the main contributor of receipts in relation to money laundering, being responsible for 56% (£230.4 million) of the total value of money laundering related receipts (£411.4 million)
• money laundering related offences also saw a large increase (21%) in the volume of forfeiture orders from 1,033 in the previous financial year to 1,250, reaching a 6 financial year high

Drug offences

• drug-related offences have been the most prominent offence type in terms of volume over the last 6 financial years, accounting for 11,187 (52%) of the 21,399 total volume of forfeiture orders over the 6 financial-year period
• drug-related offences also saw a slight increase in forfeitures recovered, from £25.7 million to £26 million for the financial year ending March 2025, accounting for 22% of the total value of forfeiture orders
• in the same period, there were 1,938 drug-related forfeiture orders, accounting for 47% of total forfeiture volumes. Of these forfeiture orders, 1,796 (92%) were led by local police forces

Fraud offences

• fraud-related offences have stayed relatively stable since the financial year ending March 2021, with the most recent year contributing £14.5 million (12%) to the total value of proceeds of crime recovered from forfeiture orders
• this was led by departments, agencies and public bodies who contributed 73% (£10.7 million) of the total value of fraud-related receipts for the most recent year
• this continues the trend from previous years with departments, agencies and public bodies consistently contributing to the majority of fraud forfeiture receipts

Forfeiture orders by high value (£1 million +) and low value cases (< £1 million)

As shown in figure 22, the financial year ending March 2025 saw a 55% increase in high value receipts, from £10.7 million to £16.6 million. The majority of the high value cases were led by local police forces who contributed 83% (£13.8 million) of the total high value receipts for that period.

Figure 22: The value of forfeiture order receipts from financial year ending March 2020 until financial year ending March 2025, in England and Wales and Northern Ireland, split by high value (£1 million +) and low value cases (< £1 million)

Source: JARD

Notes:

1. Data presented in figure 22 shows the proceeds of crime recovered at the end of an investigation from the respondent. It includes the proceeds of crime recovered on any outstanding forfeiture order which means the proceeds recovered could be linked to a seizure from a previous financial year.
2. These powers can only be used where assets or the proceeds of crime are worth more than the prescribed minimum amount currently set at £1,000.
3. Note that the value captured for forfeiture order receipts is based on the original order amount due to data entry issues on JARD.

When assessing low value forfeiture orders, performance has increased by 3% compared to previous year (from £99.8 million to £102.3 million), reaching a 6-year high. This was also primarily driven by local police, contributing 63% (£64.2 million) of the total low value receipts.

Overall, across the 6-year period, local police have been the main contributor for high value forfeiture order receipts, encompassing 48% (£81.7 million) of the total high value receipts (£168.9 million). This is followed closely by departments, agencies and public bodies who contributed £80.4 million of the total high value receipts. Notably, in the financial year ending March 2022 there were 14 high value bank forfeitures contributing £90.9 million, with £44.9 million being recovered from 2 bank forfeitures led by local police. Forfeiture recoveries peaked in the financial year ending March 2022 with £194.8 million recovered, with £97.5 million being recovered through 18 high value orders.

For low value forfeiture orders, local police have again been the main contributor, encompassing 54% of (£290.4 million) of the total low value receipts (£536.3 million) across the 6-year period.

5.3 Civil recovery powers

Background

Part 5 of POCA contains civil recovery powers to enable an enforcement authority to recover property which is determined to be or to represent property obtained through unlawful conduct. Applications are made in civil proceedings before the High Court.

Unexplained wealth orders (UWOs)

An unexplained wealth order (UWO) is an investigative power that was introduced as part of the Criminal Finances Act 2017 amendments to POCA powers. If an individual or company subject to a UWO does not provide the information sought, without a reasonable excuse, then there is a statutory presumption that the property in question is recoverable property, and it could result in the applicant for the UWO proceedings obtaining a civil recovery order. An interim freezing order can also be applied for alongside a UWO to prevent property being dissipated during the proceedings. These can be extended into property freezing orders however statistics on these orders are not provided within this statistical release.

This section provides a summary of the statistics on the number and value of UWOs and the value recovered from civil recovery order receipts.

Key notes on using these statistics

An UWO is an investigative power and not all proceeds of crime recovered by civil recovery receipts will have been subject to an UWO earlier in the process. Users should be cautious when making comparisons between the data reported for UWOs and civil recovery receipts for this reason.

Volume and agency statistics have not been provided for civil recovery order receipts because there is no available data. Further information on data quality, methodology and the legislative background of the civil system process for proceeds of crime under POCA can be found in the User guide to Asset recovery statistics.

Civil recovery investigative tools: UWOs

Based on data provided by the National Economic Crime Centre (NECC) in April 2025, £1.8 million was investigated under UWOs in the financial year ending March 2025, remaining relatively unchanged compared to the previous financial year.

The Home Office annual UWO report is a statutory requirement under the Economic Crime (Transparency and Enforcement) Act 2022 to report annually on the number of UWOs obtained for an applied each year. The report will be published separately to the annual statistical bulletin every September.

Value of receipts recovered from civil recovery orders

Data presented on civil recovery orders receipts is provided by the National Crime Agency (NCA). These statistics are considered as experimental due to the quality of the administrative dataset which has been used in their production. For further information on experimental statistics and data quality issues please refer to the accompanying User guide to Asset recovery statistics.

In the financial year ending March 2025, £7.5 million was recovered under civil recovery orders, marking a 1% increase from £7.4 million in the previous financial year, but also a 19% decrease compared to the median value for the last 6 financial years (£9.3 million).

Figure 23: The value of proceeds of crime recovered through civil recovery order receipts from the financial year ending March 2020 until financial year ending March 2025, in England and Wales and Northern Ireland

Source: NCA

Notes:

1. Data presented in figure 23 shows the proceeds of crime recovered from any civil recovery orders granted in England, Wales or Northern Ireland. These amounts can include receipts linked to orders made in a previous financial year.

As shown in figure 23, the value of civil recovery orders over the last 6 financial years remained relatively stable until the financial year ending March 2022. The value of civil recovery order receipts then spiked in the financial year ending March 2023, an increase of 574% compared to previous 6-year median. This is explained by one high value operation processed by the NCA obtained civil recovery order with a value of £53.9 million linked to the recovery of accounts held by one bank that had been suspended due to suspected fraud. With that high value civil recovery order removed as an outlier, the drop in performance compared to the 6-year median is lessened to a 16% decrease for the financial year ending 2025.

6. Compensation to victims

The compensation figures included within this statistical series only include compensation paid through confiscation order receipts and do not represent the full value of compensation paid to victims across the criminal justice system. Data on wider criminal courts and criminal justice statistics including compensation can be found in the Criminal justice statistics and Criminal court statistics.

It should be noted that compensation orders can only be applied for when a criminal confiscation order has been granted; forfeiture and civil recovery orders cannot have compensation orders granted against them. Compensation is only payable to the victim from confiscation order receipts when the court considers that the offender does not have the means to satisfy both their confiscation order and compensation order and accordingly, the latter should be paid out of confiscated funds.

In the financial year ending March 2025, £47.2 million in compensation was paid to victims from proceeds of crime recovered through confiscation order receipts. This is a 165% increase from the previous financial year (£17.8 million), reaching a 6 financial year high.

One of the main factors driving this rise is an increase in the compensation recovered from local police forces, increasing by 129% from the financial year ending March 2024.

Figure 24: Total compensation paid to victims from the financial year ending March 2020 until the financial year ending March 2025, in England and Wales and Northern Ireland

Source: JARD

Notes:

1. Data in figure 24 captures the total amount paid out to all victims as compensation (from confiscation) from the financial year ending March 2020 to the financial year ending March 2025.
2. A court imposing a confiscation order can also order an offender to pay compensation to the victim of their crime. If the offender does not have the means to satisfy both their confiscation order and compensation order, the court can order that compensation order to be payable from the sums recovered as part of the confiscation order.

As shown in figure 24, despite some annual fluctuation, there has been a gradual decline in the value of total compensation paid to victims since the financial year ending March 2020 with the total compensation paid to victims falling to its lowest amount of £15.5 million in the financial year ending March 2023.

Although the dip between the financial years ending March 2020 and March 2021 mirrors the dip in overall confiscation order receipts in those respective years, the value of compensation paid to victims does not always reflect the overall proceeds of crime recovered from confiscation order receipts within the financial year as compensation is only payable to the victim from confiscation order receipts when the court considers that the offender does not have the means to satisfy both their confiscation order and compensation order and accordingly, the latter should be paid out of confiscated funds. This is seen in the financial year ending March 2023 when the highest value of confiscation order receipts was obtained (£178.8 million) but the lowest value of compensation within the last 6 financial years was granted. The subsequent financial year ending March 2024 also saw confiscation order receipts decrease to £128.5 million, but compensation value increase from £15.5 million to £17.8 million.

Compensation granted in the financial year ending March 2025 made up 30% of confiscation order receipts, compared to 14% in the previous financial year.

Compensation by agency sector

Figure 25: Total compensation paid to victims from the financial year ending March 2020 until the financial year ending March 2025, in England and Wales and Northern Ireland, split by agency sector

Source: JARD

Notes:

1. Data in figure 25 captures the total amount paid out to all victims as compensation (from confiscation) from the financial year ending March 2020 to the financial year ending March 2025.
2. A court imposing a confiscation order can also order an offender to pay compensation to the victim of their crime. If the offender does not have the means to satisfy both their confiscation order and compensation order, the court can order that compensation order to be payable from the sums recovered as part of the confiscation order.

Of the £47.2 million paid in compensation in the financial year ending March 2025:

• £29.0 million (61%) were associated with confiscation orders processed by local police forces
• £6.9 million (15%) were associated with confiscation orders processed by departments, agencies and public bodies
• £4.8 million (10%) were associated with confiscation orders processed by regional police forces
• £4.0 million (8%) were associated with confiscation orders processed by unassigned agencies
• £2.6 million (5%) were associated with confiscation orders processed by local authorities
• local police forces have paid the largest amount of victim compensation from confiscation order receipts over the last 6 financial years accounting for £98.5 million (65%)

Across these last 6 financial years fraud-related offences have contributed to most to the compensation paid by local police forces with £15.5 million being attributed to fraud-related offences in the financial year ending March 2025. For all agency sectors the most common offence related to compensation being processed was fraud.

Regional police forces processed £4.8 million in compensation in the financial year ending March 2025. This is the highest value since the financial year ending March 2020 where £4.9 million was processed in compensation. Over the last 4 years, the value of compensation processed by regional police forces has continued to increase.

Departments, agencies and public bodies reached a 6 financial year high for compensation processed from confiscation orders in the financial year ending March 2025 at £6.9 million. This peak can mainly be attributed to the substantial increase in fraud-related offences processed by departments, agencies and public bodies with an increase of 707% compared to the previous financial year figure of £855,000.

Compensation by primary offence type

Of the £47.2 million paid in compensation in the financial year ending March 2025:

• £33.1 million (70%) were associated with fraud-related offences
• £11.8 million (25%) were associated with theft-related offences
• £1.5 million (3%) were associated with money laundering related offences
• the remaining £877,000 (2%) were associated with drugs, modern slavery and offences categorised as other
• fraud-related offences have remained the most prominent primary offence type for compensation over the last 6 financial years

Fraud-related offences accounted for 68% (£102.7 million) of compensation processed since the financial year ending March 2020. Local Police Force have processed £60.3 million of compensation relating to fraud offences over this period, accounting for 59% of all fraud-related compensation.

Money laundering related offences have decreased by 30% from £2.1 million in the financial year ending March 2024 to £1.5 million in the financial year ending March 2025. Local police forces were the most prominent agency sector, accounting for £1.4 million (91%) of all money laundering related compensation in financial year ending March 2025.

Compensation for theft-related offences has reached a 6 financial year high at £11.8 million in the latest financial year, a 576% increase compared to the previous financial year (£1.7 million), and a 320% increase compared to the median (£2.8 million) for the last 6 financial years. It should be noted that certain offence types (like fraud and theft) are more likely to have easily identifiable victims than other offences and are therefore more likely to have compensation orders associated with confiscation orders.

7. Asset Recovery Incentivisation Scheme (ARIS)

ARIS was introduced in 2006 to allow a proportion of the proceeds of crime recovered under POCA, to be redistributed to agencies involved in the asset recovery process. The Home Office encourages agencies to invest ARIS funds to drive up performance on asset recovery or, where appropriate, to fund local crime fighting priorities for the benefit of the community.

Data presented on the ARIS payments is provided by a Home Office administrative database.

7.1 ARIS payments distributed to POCA agencies

In the financial year ending March 2025, £160.3 million was distributed directly to POCA agencies. While this represents a 63% increase compared to the previous year, the rise was primarily driven by a previous exceptional high value asset recovery case that resulted in a delayed ARIS payment with higher-than-normal funds paid to the SFO for the financial year ending March 2025. If this exceptional case is treated as an outlier and excluded from the analysis, the increase is reduced to 28% (£125.6 million) compared to the previous year.

For consistency and accuracy, all subsequent analysis in this section will treat the SFO payment as an outlier and will use adjusted figures that exclude its impact.

Figure 26: ARIS receipts paid to POCA agencies from the financial year ending March 2020 until financial year ending March 2025, in England and Wales and Northern Ireland, by agency sector

Source: Home Office

Notes:

1. Due to the process involved in calculating, assuring and distributing funds, ARIS payments are distributed a quarter in arrears with the final 2 quarterly payment made in the following financial year.
2. Data presented in figure 26 shows the distribution of ARIS payments to POCA agencies based on administrative data managed by the Home Office.
3. The financial year 2024–25 includes a delayed outlier ARIS payment which has been highlighted for awareness, it will be excluded from subsequent analysis to ensure consistency in year-on-year comparisons

ARIS funding in the financial year ending March 2025

ARIS payments increased by 28% compared to the previous year with the 5 largest recipients of ARIS funds being HMCTS (£24.1 million), CPS (£17.1 million), Metropolitan Police (£14.3 million), HM Revenue & Customs (£10.8 million) and the National Crime Agency (£7.9 million). These agencies were also the largest recipients of ARIS funds over the last 6 financial years, accounting for £393.1 million of the £660.9 million (59%) total ARIS payments.

In the financial year ending March 2025, the amount of ARIS paid to departments, agencies and public bodies was £64.7 million, accounting for 51% of the total amount of ARIS payments made to POCA agencies. Local police forces and regional police forces received £53.5 million (43%) and £3.7 million (3%) respectively. In the same period, 129 local authorities received ARIS payments totalling £3.7 million.

ARIS funding trends over the 6-year period

Since the financial year ending March 2020:

• departments, agencies and public bodies have received more in ARIS payments than any other agency sector, accounting for 59% (£408 million) ARIS payments over the last 6 financial years; this higher proportion for departments, agencies and public bodies is largely due to HMCTS enforcing all cases and the CPS prosecuting the majority of cases, which results in a greater share of ARIS payments being allocated to these bodies
• ARIS payments saw a steady decrease from the financial year ending March 2022 to the financial year ending March 2024, mirroring the overall decrease in the proceeds of crime recovered through POCA in the same period (down 31% from March 2022 to March 2024).

Real terms comparison

As seen in figure 27, since the financial year ending March 2020, the total ARIS funding distributed to POCA agencies in real terms has increased by 47% from £111.9 million to £164.5 million in the financial year ending March 2025. In nominal terms, the increase is even more pronounced with an increase of 82%, from £88.3 million to £160.3 million. This indicates that not only has the nominal value of ARIS funds grown, but the increase has also outpaced inflation resulting in real terms increase.

Figure 27: Nominal and real term value payments to POCA agencies under the ARIS scheme for financial years ending March 2020 to financial year ending March 2025

Source: Home Office

Notes:

1. Due to the process involved in calculating, assuring and distributing funds, ARIS payments are distributed a quarter in arrears with the final 2 quarterly payment made in the following financial year.
2. Data presented in figure 27 shows the distribution of ARIS payments not the allocations based on administrative data managed by the Home Office.
3. The statistics in figure 27 are presented in real terms, adjusted for inflation to current prices (financial year 2025/26). Figures have been converted to real terms using the latest GDP deflators available at time of publication (published June 2025).

Further detail on real term figures can be found in table 12 of the Asset recovery statistics, financial years ending 2020 to 2025: data tables accompanying this bulletin.

7.2 Use of Asset Recovery Incentivisation Scheme (ARIS) funding

Information presented on the use of ARIS funds is taken from a data collection managed by the Home Office. These statistics are considered experimental due to the quality of this data collection which they are produced from. For further information on experimental statistics and known data quality issues with the data sources used in the bulletin please refer to the accompanying User guide to Asset recovery statistics.

Following the previous Use of ARIS Funds data collection (which covered ARIS funds spent in the financial year ending March 2023), the Home Office consulted with a sample of POCA agencies about how to improve both the response rate and quality of the data returned. This resulted in a number of changes being made to the latest Use of ARIS Funds questionnaire distributed, which covered ARIS funds spent in the financial year ending March 2024. Previous statistics on the use of ARIS funds published in this bulletin included a comparison of how ARIS funds were spent over time, however, due to these changes data covering the financial year ending March 2024 is not comparable to previous data published on the use of ARIS funds. For more information about the consultation and subsequent improvements, please see the accompanying User guide to Asset recovery statistics.

Statistics in this section are based on the POCA-enabled agencies which submitted a data return. Findings for the financial year ending March 2024 are based on responses from 99 POCA agencies, further details on the response rates can be found in the User guide to Asset recovery statistics under section 9.4.

Table 1: Use of ARIS funds by POCA agencies for financial year ending March 2024

Spend type	ARIS funds spent (millions)	Proportion of funds spent (%)
Spend related to asset recovery	£61.8	78%
Spend unrelated to asset recovery	£17.5	22%
Total ARIS spend reported	£79.3

Source: Home Office

Notes:

1. Data presented in table 1 is based on POCA agencies submitting a response to the Use of ARIS Funds data collection. As such, figures do not reflect the spend of all POCA-enabled agencies in England, Wales and Northern Ireland that received ARIS funds due to some agencies not providing a response.
2. Data presented in table 1 is sensitive to the spending of ARIS funds reported by POCA-enabled agencies which receive large sums of ARIS monies.
3. Figures represent expenditure in the financial year ending March 2024, which may not necessarily correspond to the year in which the ARIS allocation was made.

In the financial year ending March 2024, agencies reported spending £79.3 million of ARIS funds. The majority of this (78%, £61.8 million), was reported as being spent on things which were related to asset recovery.

Agencies who indicated that they had spent as least some ARIS funds on things related to asset recovery in the financial year ending March 2024 were asked to give further detail on what these funds were spent on, under the categories of staffing, training, equipment, or ‘other’:

• staffing was the most frequently reported way in which ARIS funds spent on things related to asset recovery were spent, with 45 agencies reporting spend in this area; this included 32 responses which specifically indicated that ARIS money was spent on funding financial investigators
• equipment was the second-most frequently reported way in which ARIS funds spent on things related to asset recovery were spent, with 31 agencies reporting spend in this area; this included 14 responses which indicated that funds had been spent on software/licenses.
• 18 agencies reported asset recovery-related spend on training; over half of these (10) specifically referenced the training and/or accreditation of financial investigators
• the most commonly listed area of spend noted in the ‘other’ category was legal fees (mentioned by 7 agencies)

Less than a quarter of ARIS funds spent (22%, £17.5 million) were reported as being spent on things unrelated to asset recovery.

7.3 ARIS Top Slice

The ARIS Top Slice is a competed grant launched in 2015, available to all POCA empowered agencies, to support investment in key national and regional capabilities or to test innovative new approaches to improve asset recovery processes and performance. The funds for the grant come from a small deduction from ARIS receipts prior to their distribution to POCA agencies and the Home Office. Decisions on funding allocations are made by Ministers from the Home Office, Ministry of Justice, and Attorney General’s Office.

ARIS Top Slice statistics

These statistics are considered as experimental due to the quality of the administrative dataset which has been used in their production. For further information on experimental statistics and data quality please refer to the accompanying User guide to Asset recovery statistics.

In the financial year ending March 2022, it was agreed by Ministers to raise the Top Slice budget from £7.5 million (since the financial year ending March 2019) to £13.9 million. In the financial year ending March 2024, Ministers continued agreement for a Top Slice budget of £13.9 million.

For the financial year ending March 2025, 16 projects were awarded funding using the Top Slice budget with a total value of £13.3 million. High value funding (£1 million+) was granted to the following projects:

• £2.1 million to NCA to maintain the Joint Asset Recovery Database and helpdesk
• £2.0 million for the National Police Chiefs’ Council (NPCC) to coordinate and deliver Asset Confiscation Enforcement teams in each Regional Organised Crime Unit (ROCU)
• £1.7 million to deliver a co-ordinated multi-agency cell to tackle illicit assets at the Border, led by Home Office
• £1.7 million to develop the cybercrime programme and build cryptocurrency capability, led by the NPCC and Serious Fraud Office
• £1.1 million for the CPS to dedicate a legal team to revisit defendants who have not paid their full criminal benefit from their original confiscation order

In addition, £975,000 was collectively identified in underspends from various Top Slice projects. To utilise this underspend, funds were reallocated to other projects. This reallocated amount uplifted 4 of the 5 projects listed above. Further details can be found in table 14 of the Asset recovery statistics, financial years ending 2020 to 2025: data tables accompanying this bulletin.

8. International asset recovery

Data is provided by a Home Office administrative database and from data requested from agencies in Home Office reporting exercises. These statistics are badged as experimental due to the quality of the administrative datasets which have been used to produce them. Supporting information on known data quality issues with the various data sources used in the bulletin for experimental statistics are outlined in the User guide to Asset recovery statistics. It should be noted that the Home Office administrative databases only hold information on cases where the Home Office has been contacted and may not capture all international asset recovery that occurs.

8.1 International cooperation

The data presented is provided by a Home Office administrative database and only covers cases where the Home Office has been contacted and there is an asset share, therefore not all international cooperation in relation to asset recovery is captured. This section sets out the value and the volume of proceeds of crime recovered from asset recovery orders with an asset share from the financial year ending March 2020 to the financial year ending March 2025 that are:

• executed in England and Wales, or Northern Ireland following the receipt of mutual legal assistance request from another country which resulted in an asset share
• executed abroad following the receipt of mutual legal assistance from England and Wales, and Northern Ireland which resulted in an asset share

In this document, we have defined this as ‘international cooperation’. International cooperation executed in England and Wales, or Northern Ireland is a subset of the asset recovery statistics outlined in previous chapters.

Within this remit of international cooperation, the value and volume of proceeds of crime recovered from grand corruption asset recovery orders are not included. Grand corruption statistics are presented in Section 8.2 in this commentary.

The UK engages in asset sharing, which is the division of the funds recovered using asset recovery powers between countries, as a recognition of the joint efforts to recover assets and to encourage further co-operation.

The sharing of confiscated assets is an administrative process between the Home Office and the Government of the requesting or requested country or territory. The usual proportion that is shared is 50:50; however, under certain circumstances the UK may decide to negotiate different proportions, for example, if there are victims involved. This will be considered on a case-by-case basis.

Figure 28: The total value of proceeds of crime recovered via international asset sharing from the financial year ending March 2020 to the financial year ending March 2025, in England and Wales and Northern Ireland

Source: Home Office

Notes:

1. Figures presented for ‘Total value of proceeds of crime recovered’ show the full value of proceeds of crime recovered as a result of international cooperation. The ‘Value of proceeds of crime retained by the UK government’ represents the value of proceeds of crime recovered which are retained by the UK government following an asset share.
2. The figures presented for ‘Total value of proceeds of crime recovered’ and the ‘Value of proceeds of crime retained by the UK government’ only capture cases where an asset share has been sought. There might be other international asset recovery cases where asset sharing did not occur that are not captured within the Home Office database and are therefore not recorded.

In the financial year ending March 2025, a total of £4.0 million was recovered through international cooperation where an asset share occurred, a 32% decrease from the previous financial year. This is primarily due to financial year ending March 2024 having the highest value asset share within this series (£5.8 million) which was mainly driven by a single case (£4.5 million recovered from one case, within which the UK received a share of £1.8 million). In financial year ending March 2025 over half the value (54%) that was recovered came from a single asset share worth £2.2 million, this is the second highest value recovered through international cooperation that is recorded in this series. This demonstrates a positive trend of trying to recover more high value (£1 million +) assets in all international cases. Despite the decrease in value compared to financial year ending March 2024, the value recovered in financial year ending March 2025 was 10% higher compared to the 6-year median of £3.6 million, suggesting performance remains strong and demonstrates the UK’s continued collaboration with other countries and territories.

This decline compared to the previous year was also reflected in the value of the amount retained by the UK government, with £1.8 million being retained by the UK government in the financial year ending March 2025, a 21% decrease compared to the previous year. It should be noted that the value retained by the UK is partially dependent on the value recovered in that year and if there are identifiable victims to compensate.

Operational agencies in England and Wales and Northern Ireland have expanded the number of countries and territories they have cooperated with compared to previous years. Collaborating with an increasing number of jurisdictions facilitates further asset recovery, depriving more criminals of their proceeds of crime. Across the relevant 6-year period operational agencies in England and Wales and Northern Ireland have cooperated with the following countries : Australia, Barbados, Belgium, Cayman Islands, Czechia, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Guernsey, Isle of Man, Italy, Jamaica, Jersey, Luxembourg, Netherlands, New Zealand, Romania, Spain, Switzerland, and the United States of America.

8.2 Grand corruption

These statistics are experimental. The data presented is taken from administrative databases which are managed by the Home Office, supplemented with data requested from agencies in a reporting exercise conducted by the Home Office. The statistics presented will only represent those agencies which have provided a return for this reporting exercise and not necessarily the entire group of agencies who engage in this work.

Users should be aware that the grand corruption figures presented in this publication may include revisions to data submitted by agencies in previous years. These corrections are applied retrospectively to improve accuracy. For this reason, users are advised not to compare grand corruption data across publications. Supporting information on the methodology and limitations of grand corruption data, as well as details on experimental statistics can be found in the User guide to Asset recovery statistics.

This section sets out, from financial year ending March 2020 to financial year ending March 2025, the value of:

• proceeds of grand corruption restrained, seized or frozen via criminal mechanisms
• proceeds of grand corruption restrained, seized or frozen via civil mechanisms
• proceeds of grand corruption recovered via criminal mechanisms
• proceeds of grand corruption recovered via civil mechanisms
• proceeds of grand corruption returned to foreign government following UK law enforcement action

Including grand corruption cases that are:

• executed in England and Wales, or Northern Ireland
• executed abroad following receipt of a mutual legal assistance request from England and Wales, and Northern Ireland
• executed in England and Wales or Northern Ireland following the receipt of mutual legal assistance from another country

There are several routes that can be taken in order to pursue asset recovery cases that are related to grand corruption. Within this section, assets that are recovered outside of POCA via Deferred Prosecution Agreements (DPAs) under the Crime and Courts Act 2013 are presented as a separate sub-section. This is to recognise the extensive work that law enforcement agencies engage in to combat grand corruption, which can mean utilising different legislations where appropriate.

The proceeds of grand corruption obtained by POCA 2002 orders, executed in England and Wales, or Northern Ireland are a subset of the asset denial and asset recovered statistics outlined in previous chapters.

Grand corruption is often defined as acts of corruption involving the misuse or abuse of high-level entrusted power by senior public officials as defined by reference to the United Nations Convention Against Corruption (UNCAC). Grand corruption threatens political stability and sustainable development. Acts that might fall into this category include bribery of public or private officials, embezzlement, illicit enrichment, abuse of function or the laundering of the proceeds of crime.

Expansion in the data collection and cleansing has been undertaken for this statistical release; this means that the data presented for grand corruption supersedes the data included in previous publications. Care should also be taken when interpreting this data, since some cases have been omitted due to ongoing sensitivities. Further details about the methodology and data quality issues are outlined in the User guide to Asset recovery statistics.

Users should note figures presented for proceeds of grand corruption restrained, seized and frozen can relate to ongoing investigations which means no further information can be shared. These cases have been identified at an early stage in the process as cases where agencies intelligence suspects assets derive from grand corruption cases involving foreign states.

For clarity this section has been split into grand corruption cases pursed under POCA 2002 and grand corruption cases pursued under the Crime and Courts Act 2013 (DPAs).

Grand Corruption Cases Pursued under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002

Table 2: Proceeds of crime denied via criminal and civil routes, under POCA 2002, from international grand corruption cases.

Financial year	Total value of proceeds of grand corruption denied (civil)	Total value of proceeds of grand corruption denied (criminal)
2019-20	£121,488,452	£20,000,000
2020-21	£3,306,166	£96,439,000
2021-22	£285,213,755	£48,357,243
2022-23	£244,091,465	£39,209,746
2023-24	£2,479,787	£11,309,957
2024-25	£2,283,938	£33,608,070

Source: Home office, NCA ICU, NCA IACCC, SFO and CPS

Notes:

1. Table 2 may not include the total value of the proceeds of grand corruption since there may be other agencies that have completed grand corruption work that has not been captured in this exercise.
2. The value of proceeds of grand corruption denied refers to those restrained, seized, frozen or using other mechanisms to stop an individual accessing their assets.
3. The value of proceeds of grand corruption denied refers to those restrained, seized, frozen or using other mechanisms to stop an individual accessing their assets.
4. The value presented only reflects the value that was restrained, seized, frozen (either under civil or criminal mechanisms) under POCA 2002 legislation.

The value of proceeds of grand corruption denied is based on the estimated order value (restraint orders), finalised order amount (AFOs, cash seizures and listed assets) and estimated value of assets (prohibition orders).

In the financial year ending March 2025, the total value of the proceeds of grand corruption denied via criminal mechanisms, under POCA 2002, was £33.6 million, which is a 197% increase compared to the previous financial year (£11.3 million) but 8% lower than the 6-year median (£36.4 million) for this reporting period. The increase seen compared to the previous financial year was predominately driven by high value restraint orders. Since the peak in financial year ending March 2021 where £96.4 million was denied using criminal mechanisms under POCA 2002, there has been a steady decline in the value denied until the increase seen within the most recent financial year.

Since the financial year ending March 2020, £658.9 million has been denied via civil mechanisms under POCA 2002. However, there was a substantial drop in the value denied in the financial year ending March 2024 (down 99% from £244.1 million in the financial year ending March 2023 to £2.5 million in the financial year ending March 2024) whilst the value denied in financial year ending March 2025 was £2.3 million marking a 6-year low in the value denied. This decline is due to exceptional performance in the financial years ending March 2022 and 2023, where there was unprecedented asset denial, predominately through the use of prohibition orders. These prohibition orders totalled £497.1 million across those 2 financial years.

A prohibition order can be granted in relation to relevant property in England and Wales or Northern Ireland which is the subject of an external request from another country or jurisdiction. Further information on the legislative background and system process for proceeds of crime under POCA can be found in the User guide to Asset recovery statistics.

In April 2022, a Prohibition Order processed by the NCA for £228 million was granted by the High Court acting under a request from the US Department of Justice (DOJ), who are pursuing assets which are suspected to be or represent the proceeds of the multi-billion Malaysian Development Board (1MDB) fraud against the Malaysian Government.

The majority of the funds denied via civil mechanisms, under POCA 2002, within financial year ending March 2025 relate to listed asset seizures, with a notable case involving the seizure of gold bars and a painting. Further details about this case can be found here Wanted: Money launderer who ran professional services for organised crime groups - National Crime Agency. This highlights that despite a decrease in the value of civil denials under POCA 2002, there has been substantial progress in pursuing high value cases and seizing a wide variety of assets.

The total value of the proceeds of grand corruption recovered, under POCA 2002, in the financial year ending March 2025 were:

• £2 million recovered via civil mechanisms
• £77,000 recovered via confiscation orders

Table 3: Proceed of crime recovered via civil and criminal route, under POCA 2002, from international grand corruption cases.

Financial year	Total value of proceeds of grand corruption recovered (civil)	Total value of proceeds of grand corruption recovered (criminal)
2019-20	£139,734,224	£73,000
2020-21	£321,665	£2,649,959
2021-22	£18,367,534	£43,440,985
2022-23	£36,367,150	£93,483,995
2023-24	£150,449	£52,601,497
2024-25	£1,957,589	£77,470

Source: Home office, NCA ICU, NCA IACCC, SFO and CPS

Notes:

1. The value of proceeds of grand corruption recovered is based on the total proceeds of crime recovered from forfeiture orders, confiscation orders, civil recovery orders and settlements under POCA 2002 legislation
2. Table 3 may not include the total value of the proceeds of grand corruption since there may be other agencies that have completed grand corruption work that has not been captured in this exercise.

Compared to the financial year ending March 2024 the value recovered by criminal mechanisms in the most recent year has decreased substantially by almost 100% from £52.6 million to £77,000. However, the large value recovered in the previous financial year was primarily due to £44.2 million being recovered from a confiscation order by the NCA.

Within the financial year ending March 2025, £2 million was recovered via civil mechanisms, which is more than thirteenfold increase compared to the previous year figure of £150,000. For the most recent year, listed asset forfeiture orders accounted for 53% of the amount recovered, followed by account forfeiture orders which accounted for 44%, with the remaining being cash forfeiture orders.

Asset return

Asset return refers to the process by which the proceeds of corruption are returned to their prior legitimate owner or to compensate the victims of the crime. The UK, as a signatory to the UN Convention Against Corruption is obligated to return funds where the conditions for mandatory return are met; however, the UK also exercises its discretion to return funds in appropriate cases when it is not otherwise mandated (in line with Article 57(3)(c) of the Convention). The UK’s process for returning assets is set out in the UK’s Framework for transparent and accountable asset return. There are other ways to return assets, including assigning compensation within deferred prosecution agreements, if the Crown Court recognises that there are victims. Asset return can take a substantial amount of time due to the complex nature of international cases.

Figure 29: The total value of proceeds of grand corruption returned to foreign countries from the financial year ending March 2020 to the financial year ending March 2025

Source: Home Office, NCA, SFO, CPS

Notes:

1. The figures presented only capture cases where data has been provided by agencies and the Home Office database, there may be grand corruption cases that are not captured and are therefore not recorded.
2. The value of proceeds of grand corruption returned to foreign government is based on the total amount transferred to the foreign state and presented in the financial year the funds were transferred.
3. A substantial proportion of the proceeds of grand corruption returned to foreign government will relate to proceeds of grand corruption restrained, seized or frozen in previous financial years. Proceeds of grand corruption that were restrained or seized may be subsequently released or returned to the individual if their legitimacy is subsequently proven.
4. The data presented only refers to the value returned under UNCAC not via other alternative methods.

For the financial year ending March 2025, £65,615 were returned to foreign governments, a decrease from the previous years figure of £150,000 returned.

Grand Corruption cases pursued outside of the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002

As mentioned above there are other routes outside of POCA 2002 that can be utilised in order to tackle grand corruption, including but not limited to Deferred Prosecution Agreements (DPAs) under the Crime and Courts Act 2013. This is the first year that mechanisms outside of POCA have been highlighted separately and continues the UK’s ongoing commitment to transparency around grand corruption asset recovery.

A DPA is an agreement that is reached between a prosecutor and an organisation which could be prosecuted, under the supervision of a judge. The agreement allows a prosecution to be suspended for a defined period, provided the organisation meets certain specified conditions. DPA’s apply to organisations, never individuals. Within a DPA compensation can be designated, and the Home Office under a memorandum of understanding can transfer the funds to the correct government.

This section includes the agreed payment and value returned under DPAs in relation to grand corruption and are therefore not under POCA 2002.

Due to the nature of the mechanisms used to recover grand corruption funds using legislations outside of POCA 2002 there are no denial orders granted in this time frame.

As outlined above one of the ways outside of POCA 2002 where companies can cooperate with law enforcement agencies, fines can be imposed, and the risk of re-offending can be mitigated is through DPAs. Under DPAs related to grand corruption there was:

• £832.3 million in payments agreed under DPAs for 2019-20
• £103.3 million in payments agreed under DPAs for 2022-23
• £211,000 returned as compensation in 2021-22

Within the financial year ending March 2020 a DPA was agreed between the Serious Fraud Office and Airbus SE about the alleged commission by Airbus SE of offences of failure to prevent bribery. The SFO monitored Airbus until 2023 to make sure they complied with the obligations outlined in the DPA. Utilising a DPA facilitated multi-jurisdictional coordination, allowing enforcement agencies from different countries to reach global settlements. DPAs allow harmonised enforcement of anti-corruption laws without having to await legal outcomes in other jurisdictions. Further details about this case can be found here SFO Deferred Prosecution Agreement with Airbus - GOV.UK.

In the financial year ending March 2020 there was another DPA between the SFO and Guralp Systems Limited of offences of conspiracy to make corruption payments and failing to prevent bribery by employees. In November 2024, SFO informed the court that they believed the terms of the DPA have been breached. Court proceedings are currently ongoing regarding Guralp Systems Limited’s non-compliance with the financial terms of its DPA. Further details about this case can be found here SFO Deferred Prosecution Agreement with Guralp Systems - GOV.UK.

In the financial year ending March 2022, £211,000 was paid out in compensation under the terms of a Deferred Prosecution Agreement agreed between AMEC Foster Wheeler Energy Limited and the SFO on 1 July 2021 (the ‘Deferred Prosecution Agreement’). The Federal Government of Nigeria was granted compensation as part of the Deferred Prosecution Agreement, which noted that the compensation “shall be deployed for the benefit of the citizens of Nigeria in a manner that is accountable and transparent”. The Home Office agreed a Memorandum of Understanding between the UK and the Federal Government of Nigeria to meet this requirement. Details on the transfer, including how the funds will be spent, are set out in a Memorandum of Understanding signed by the UK and Nigeria in February 2022.

DPAs have several benefits. As mentioned above they can facilitate cross border cooperation, in both evidence gathering and reaching settlements that reflect the damage that occurred. Additionally, DPAs protect innocent stakeholders (employees, suppliers, pensioners) from the fallout of corporate wrongdoing. This is because DPAs relate to a company rather than an individual. It has been seen previously where companies have collapsed due to criminal convictions. DPAs also require that companies implement compliance programmes and undergo monitoring. This gives companies a chance to improve and set institutional, limiting the chance of this happening again. Furthermore, DPAs incentivise companies to self-disclose misconduct and cooperate with investigations which leads to further evidence gathering which is needed in these complex corruption cases. This section highlights the range of powers and routes law enforcement agencies in the UK will take in order to disrupt criminal activity and get justice for victims of grand corruption.

8.3 International Settlements

This is the first iteration of the annual statistical bulletin which includes international settlements. They have been added to provide further transparency on international asset recovery.

Background

The Secretary of State (Home Office), the Treasury, the Attorney General and Advocate General for Northern Ireland have issued guidance to the relevant authorities in the UK on the use of asset recovery powers in the Proceeds of Crime (POA) Act, including reaching settlement with defendants.

As outlined in this publication, there are several routes that can be taken to recover assets under POCA 2002, including confiscation orders (Crown Court), civil recovery (High Court) and Civil Forfeiture (Magistrates Court). Certain agencies (NCA & HMRC) can also conduct tax assessments in relation to income, gains and profits arising as a result of criminal conduct. These powers are exercised in the public interest by calculating the best route to contribute to the reduction and disruption of crime.

The POCA 2002 guidance sets out a non-exhaustive list of circumstances where it might be more feasible to pursue a non-conviction based outcome, including where assets are located in the UK, but the criminality has taken place outside the jurisdiction.

International Settlements

The guidance also confirms that a relevant authority may agree to accept by way of a settlement a reduced sum in satisfaction of a civil recovery claim, if satisfied that:

(i) the sum is reasonable, having regard to all relevant circumstances including the chances of recovering the full amount claimed and the time and public funds likely to be expended in attempting to do so; and

(ii) accepting the reduced sum would not damage public confidence.

Settlements are defined as a voluntary agreement between law enforcement agencies and the individual suspected of benefitting from criminal conduct. The terms of a settlement, often outlined in a Consent Order, must be agreed by both parties and a Judge in the High Court or a Magistrate in the lower courts.

Settlements can be used as an alternative method to traditional asset recovery for depriving individuals of their suspected proceeds of crime. They are used to resolve investigations at an early stage without the time and expense associated with a trial. While unlawful conduct is at the centre of POCA, settlements do not constitute a finding of guilt in respect of a specific criminal offence. The primary aim is to recover funds, from those involved in unlawful conduct as efficiently as possible and in a manner which maintains public confidence. In terms of harm reduction, the real value of pursuing the proceeds of crime comes from the disruptive effect it has on serious organised crime, aiming to derail how these groups traditionally generate money and preventing further crimes taking place. This disruptive effect may make an early settlement more attractive if it leads to increased recovery.

The UK has increasingly been seen as an attractive jurisdiction for laundering the proceeds of crime with criminals from other jurisdictions particularly buying expensive property portfolios in central London. Due to this, an increasing number of investigations are initiated at the request of a foreign country. As outlined in the User guide to Asset recovery statistics under section 4.1, there is a variety of legal conventions that encourage states to assist each other.

Once an international request for assistance has been accepted by the UK Central Authority, law enforcement investigations tend to commence covertly with the investigating authority obtaining a variety of investigative order including Production Orders, Disclosure Orders and Unexplained Wealth Orders. Every investigation is commenced with the intention of recovering the maximum amount of the proceeds of crime. However, due to uncertainties inherent in litigation, evidential gaps and limited resourcing early settlement should always be considered.

Before settlement negotiations can begin, parameters must be authorised at a Senior Command level and will involve completing a risk analysis on the case, supported by Counsel’s objective assessment.

For the purposes of this publication, we have included the value of settlements that were agreed between the 1st of April 2024 to the 31st of March 2025. It only includes settlements where:

• the investigation originated within England and Wales and Northern Ireland with mutual legal assistance provided from another country; or
• the investigation originated from another country with mutual legal assistance provided by England and Wales and Northern Ireland

The data and information presented was provided by the NCA after a data collection exercise was completed. The data provided therefore only represents settlements concluded by the NCA and may not encompass all the settlements for financial year ending March 2025.

Within the financial year ending March 2025, there have been 2 settlements agreed by the NCA with international defendants. The 2 settlements totalled £26 million in recoverable property.

The first settlement was agreed for a total of £14 million, with the NCA believing the assets were obtained as a direct result of large-scale fraud and embezzlement, false accounting and money laundering by the Defendant’s husband who, as the former chairman of the International Bank of Azerbaijan, has been convicted and imprisoned in Azerbaijan. The NCA collaborated with a host of different countries since there were several accounts and companies in different jurisdictions including the British Virgin Islands, Panama, Cyprus and Luxembourg. Monies were traced into a property in Knightsbridge and a golf course in Ascot. The High Court Recovery Order on consent confirmed that the properties were or represented the proceeds of crime but under the terms of settlement it made no specific finding of criminality in relation to the defendant herself.

This settlement concluded an investigation that had been running for over 6 years during which time the Defendant had challenged the UWO regime in the Court of Appeal. Increasing challenges with regards to the conduct of concomitant listed assets proceedings in the Magistrates Court made the settlement in the High Court a positive outcome.

The second settlement was agreed for a total of £12 million, relating to assets that the NCA suspected were acquired by the Defendants as a result of large-scale financial frauds committed in the People’s Republic of China and the laundering of the proceeds of this criminality in overseas jurisdictions, including the UK. Recognising the challenges of gathering evidence from overseas, early settlement was identified as a prudent avenue to explore. The settlement agreed between the parties for £12 million stopped the NCA’s civil recovery proceedings. The Defendants paid a sum representative of the value the property the NCA alleged was the proceeds of crime. The Consent Order provided no finding of fact in relation to the criminal activity of the individuals involved. This case involved co-operation with law enforcement colleagues in Jersey and the authorities in China.

9. Annexes

9.1 Annex A: Modern slavery data

Modern slavery data is published as a distinct subset of data, where the main related criminal offence type is modern slavery. It has been provided to support the Modern Slavery Annual Report released in November 2021.

Value of assets restrained and recovered

There were £945,000 of modern slavery-related proceeds of crime recovered from confiscation orders and forfeiture orders in the financial year ending March 2025.

Of these:

• £487,000 was recovered from confiscation orders receipts, an 83% increase from £266,000 in the previous financial year
• £457,000 was recovered from forfeiture orders receipts, a 22% decrease from £588,000 in the previous financial year

From the financial years ending March 2021 to March 2025 there has been an inverse trend in the amounts recovered through confiscation and forfeiture orders for modern slavery related proceeds of crime. A decline in confiscation recoveries typically coincided with an increase in forfeiture recoveries, and vice versa, leading to shifts in the primary source of recoveries each year. This inverse trend peaked in the financial year ending March 2022 when forfeiture orders contributed 75% of proceeds of crime recovered and confiscation orders contributed 25%. Since then, the distribution has gradually stabilised year on year culminating in the most recent financial year ending March 2025 where confiscation orders contributed 52% and forfeiture orders contributed 48% proceeds of crime recovered.

On restraint orders, there were £3.0 million restrained in the financial year ending March 2025, a 297% increase from £750,000 in the previous financial year. This was primarily driven by the NCA and the Metropolitan Police Service who contributed to a large proportion (34% and 50% respectively) of the total amount restrained that year in relation to modern slavery offences. This is in contrast to the peak in assets restrained in the financial year ending March 2023 which was caused by one high value order (£1 million+) that made up 81% of the total amount of modern slavery related restraint orders that year.

Confiscation order imposition saw a 69% decrease from £1.6 million in the financial year ending March 2024 to £505,000 in the financial year ending March 2025, reaching a 6 financial year low. However, this was due to peak in confiscation order impositions in the financial year ending March 2024 caused by one high value imposition (£1 million+) which accounted for 68% of total impositions for that year. In contrast, the financial year ending March 2025 saw much lower value imposed per case, with the highest value imposed being £209,000 by the Metropolitan Police Service.

Figure 30: The value of proceeds of crime restrained and recovered through restraint orders, confiscation orders and forfeitures receipts where the main related criminal offence type is modern slavery from the financial year ending March 2020 until financial year ending March 2025, in England and Wales and Northern Ireland

Source: JARD

Notes:

1. Data presented in figure 33 shows the value of proceeds of crime recovered (confiscation orders and forfeiture orders) and restrained (restraint orders).
2. Confiscation order receipts include payments received from the defendant on any outstanding confiscation orders which means it can include payments linked to a confiscation order imposition in the current financial year and previous ones.
3. Forfeiture order receipts include the proceeds of crime recovered at the end of an investigation from the respondent. It includes proceeds of crime recovered on any outstanding forfeiture order which means proceeds recovered could be linked to a seizure from a previous financial year.
4. Restraint orders include the proceeds of crime that are restrained and cannot be accessed by the defendant whilst confiscation proceedings and enforcement are ongoing. Restraint is an optional power, and not all proceeds of crime recovered at the end of the criminal proceedings will have been subject to a restraint order earlier in the process.

Volume of assets restrained and recovered

In the financial year ending March 2025, there were 13 forfeiture orders granted for crimes related to modern slavery, down from the previous financial year where there were 20 orders. Conversely, the number of restraint orders have increased to 12 orders for the financial year ending 2025, up from the previous year which had less than 10 cases reported.

Figure 31: The volume of proceeds of crime restrained and recovered through restraint orders and forfeiture orders receipts where the offence is modern slavery from the financial year ending March 2020 until financial year ending March 2025, in England and Wales and Northern Ireland

Source: JARD

Notes:

1. Data presented in figure 31 shows the volume of proceeds of crime recovered (confiscation orders and forfeiture orders) and restrained (restraint orders).
2. Confiscation order receipts include payments received from the defendant on any outstanding confiscation orders which means it can include payments linked to a confiscation order imposition in the current financial year and previous ones.
3. Forfeiture order receipts include the proceeds of crime recovered at the end of an investigation from the respondent. It includes proceeds of crime recovered on any outstanding forfeiture order which means proceeds recovered could be linked to a seizure from a previous financial year.
4. Restraint orders include the proceeds of crime that are restrained and cannot be accessed by the defendant whilst confiscation proceedings and enforcement are ongoing. Restraint is an optional power, and not all proceeds of crime recovered at the end of the criminal proceedings will have been subject to a restraint order earlier in the process.
5. Volumes below 10 have been anonymised in line with the data tables accompanying this bulletin. Further detail can be found in the notes sheet of the Asset recovery statistics, financial years ending 2020 to 2025: data tables.

As figure 34 shows, the number of forfeiture orders for cases related to modern slavery have been declining since the financial year ending March 2023. Restraint orders have shown a consistent downward trend since the financial year ending March 2020, reaching below 10 cases for the financial years ending March 2023 and 2024, before rebounding in the financial year ending March 2025. The volume of confiscation order receipts is not reported because it is not meaningful, this is because confiscation orders can have multiple payments against one single order and does not directly link to orders imposed within the reporting period.

10. About these statistics

Future releases of this statistical publication are pre-announced on the statistics release calendar on the GOV.UK website. The accompanying User guide to Asset recovery statistics provides information on the different data sources used and the processes for this statistical release, as well as other statistical information about the Bulletin.

Tables and data

Asset recovery statistics, financial years ending 2020 to 2025: data tables provides 6-year time-series data for each POCA Power, ARIS allocations, data collected by the Home Office on the use of ARIS and proceeds of crime from international cooperation.

Feedback

Home Office is keen to receive feedback on its statistical publications to maintain their relevance for users.

Any feedback should be directed to the Asset Recovery Performance team through email: POCAPerformance@homeoffice.gov.uk

Press enquiries for this release should be directed to telephone number: 0300 123 3535.

Other enquiries on these statistics should be directed by email to: CriminalFinancesandAssetRecoveryUnit@homeoffice.gov.uk