This bill adds an Article to Chapter 25, Title 17 that defines “profits from a crime” and creates a superior state lien on those profits when a person is convicted of a felony with a statutory victim. The lien covers proceeds payable to the convicted person or anyone holding them on that person’s behalf, and the Attorney General is authorized to bring legal actions to perfect and enforce the claim.
The measure shifts how post-conviction proceeds are handled by placing the State ahead of other lienholders and by directing recovered funds toward victims and to cover prosecution and incarceration costs. That combination tightens the State’s ability to capture value linked to criminal activity but raises practical and legal trade-offs for creditors, defendants, and enforcement agencies.
At a Glance
What It Does
Creates a priority lien in favor of South Carolina on any property or income classified as profits from a crime; the lien attaches at the time of conviction and the Attorney General may pursue enforcement actions. Funds subject to appeals are held by the Attorney General in a revolving escrow trust account.
Who It Affects
Convicted individuals and any third parties holding or receiving assets on their behalf, secured and unsecured creditors with interests in a defendant’s property, prosecutors and the Office of the Attorney General, and crime victims or their dependents who are eligible for compensation.
Why It Matters
It reorders post-conviction asset allocation — elevating victim recovery and state cost recoupment over private claims — and broadens the net of seizable property to include transformed proceeds and property whose value derives in part from notoriety or special knowledge gained through the crime.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
The bill creates a statutory framework to capture value that a convicted defendant obtained through criminal activity. It starts by defining the covered conduct and proceeds: “profits from a crime” reaches both direct proceeds and property or income that came from selling, converting, or exchanging those proceeds; it also reaches assets that owe part of their value to notoriety or to knowledge the defendant gained while committing the offense.
The statute explicitly includes funds that are transferred to another person on the defendant’s behalf.
When a qualifying felony conviction occurs in circuit court, the State’s lien springs into existence with priority over all other past, present, and future liens. The lien’s attachment is immediate at conviction; if the defendant appeals, the bill requires the disputed funds to be held in a revolving escrow trust account overseen by the Attorney General and the State Crime Victim Services Division.
From an operational standpoint this creates an early claim on assets that must be tracked and frozen while appeals proceed.The bill sets a tiered distribution scheme for proceeds that are collected or released from escrow. First, up to fifty percent of the proceeds are allocated to statutory victims or their dependents, limited by the court’s determination of damages; any unused portion of that fifty percent flows into the State’s crime victims’ compensation fund.
Second, the State recoups court-related costs — including jury fees, reporter fees, prosecution expenses, lien enforcement costs, and a computed charge for imprisonment or supervision — and deposits those amounts into General Revenue. Finally, remaining funds go to the crime victims’ compensation fund for distribution to victims.To make the lien effective in practice, the Office of the Attorney General has affirmative authority to “take such legal action as is necessary to perfect and enforce” the lien.
That language anticipates civil enforcement steps against third-party transferees and requires the AG to develop the processes for identifying proceeds, litigating priority disputes, and conducting turnover proceedings. The act takes effect immediately upon the Governor’s approval, so there is no transition window spelled out for cases in midstream.
The Five Things You Need to Know
The bill creates a state lien that has priority over “all other past, present, and future liens” on any property or income the statute defines as profits from a crime.
The lien attaches at the moment of conviction in circuit court — not at sentencing or judgment collection — and applies to assets payable to the defendant or held on their behalf.
If the defendant appeals, the statute requires that funds be placed in a revolving escrow trust account with the Attorney General and the South Carolina Crime Victim Services Division until resolution.
Distribution is tiered: up to 50% of proceeds go to statutory victims or dependents (limited by court-determined damages), then court and prosecution-related costs (including a computed cost of imprisonment or supervision) are paid and deposited into General Revenue, with any remainder routed to the crime victims’ compensation fund.
The statutory definition of “profits from a crime” expressly covers converted or exchanged proceeds and assets whose value derives in part from notoriety or unique knowledge obtained through the crime, expanding the scope beyond obvious cash or property.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Definitions — scope of covered crimes and proceeds
This section sets the statutory vocabulary the rest of the Article uses. It limits “crime” to felony offenses with a statutory victim and defines “convicted” to include guilty pleas, nolo contendere pleas, Alford pleas, jury or judge convictions, and specified mental-status findings. Most consequential is the broad definition of “profits from a crime,” which reaches direct proceeds, converted or exchanged assets, and items whose value is tied to notoriety or special knowledge obtained during the criminal activity. Practically, that wording signals prosecutors can pursue non-traditional assets (for example, sale of a memoir, artwork, or a business founded on illegal gains) as proceeds.
Creation, priority, and timing of the lien; escrow during appeals
Subsection (A) establishes a lien in favor of the State that has express priority over all other liens — described as past, present, and future. The lien attaches upon conviction in circuit court, so the statutory claim arises before post-conviction collection processes like restitution orders or bankruptcy proceedings. The provision also requires funds to be held in a revolving escrow trust with the Attorney General while an appeal is pending, which creates an administrative holding mechanism and a legal status for disputed proceeds rather than immediate turnover to victims or transfer to private creditors.
Priority of distributions and how proceeds are allocated
Subsection (B) establishes a three-part distribution formula. The first allocation assigns up to half the proceeds to statutory victims or their dependents, but only to the extent of damages the court determines during lien enforcement. After that, the State recovers prosecution- and court-related costs — explicitly including jury and reporter fees, lien enforcement expenses, and a computed cost for imprisonment or supervision — and these amounts are deposited into General Revenue. Any remaining funds are funneled to the crime victims’ compensation fund. That structure creates both a capped direct payment to victims and a dedicated pathway for state cost-recovery and victim compensation beyond individual awards.
Enforcement authority assigned to the Attorney General
Subsection (C) instructs the Office of the Attorney General to take “such legal action as is necessary to perfect and enforce” the lien. The text does not prescribe methods, but it authorizes civil suits, turnover proceedings, claims against third-party transferees, and other enforcement tools the AG deems necessary. In practice, the AG will need to assemble procedures for filing notices, litigating priority contests with secured creditors, and coordinating with the Crime Victim Services Division on escrow management and distributions.
Effective date
The act takes effect upon the Governor’s approval. There is no phase-in or grandfathering provision for cases that are already pending at enactment, which means that convictions entered after approval are immediately subject to the new lien regime and the AG’s enforcement authority without transitional guidance.
This bill is one of many.
Codify tracks hundreds of bills on Justice across all five countries.
Explore Justice in Codify Search →Who Benefits and Who Bears the Cost
Every bill creates winners and losers. Here's who stands to gain and who bears the cost.
Who Benefits
- Statutory victims and their dependents — they receive a prioritized share (up to 50% as limited by court-determined damages) of proceeds tied to the defendant’s crime, increasing the likelihood of direct recovery.
- South Carolina crime victims’ compensation fund — receives any unused portion of the victims’ allocation and the ultimate residue, boosting pooled compensation resources for victims who lack direct claims.
- State General Revenue — recovers court and prosecution-related costs (including computed costs of imprisonment or supervision) which are directed into the General Revenue Fund rather than remaining as uncompensated public expense.
- Office of the Attorney General and prosecutors — gain a statutory tool to pursue proceeds and recover costs, which can strengthen plea bargaining leverage and post-conviction enforcement strategies.
Who Bears the Cost
- Convicted individuals and their estates — face immediate exposure of assets and income to a superior state lien that can reduce or eliminate recoverable property after conviction.
- Third-party transferees (family members, assignees, nominal owners) — assets or transfers received on behalf of a defendant may be subject to the lien, creating the risk of clawback litigation and loss of property.
- Secured creditors and lienholders — see their priority undermined by an expressly superior state lien, potentially reducing recoveries and complicating lending decisions when defendants have encumbered assets.
- Office of the Attorney General and state courts — will absorb operational and litigation burdens for tracing proceeds, managing escrow accounts, litigating priority disputes, and adjudicating damage determinations unless additional resources are provided.
- Correctional and supervision systems — the statute authorizes assessing computed costs of imprisonment or supervision against defendants, effectively shifting some operational cost recovery onto persons convicted.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
The central dilemma is balancing victims’ recovery and the State’s interest in recouping prosecution and incarceration costs against the property and contractual rights of defendants and private creditors. The statute accelerates state claims at conviction to benefit victims and public coffers, but doing so risks undermining creditor expectations, complicating appeals and due-process protections, and generating contentious valuation and tracing disputes with no easy administrative fix.
The bill packs broad language that raises implementation and legal questions. Giving the State a lien that outranks “all other past, present, and future liens” can collide with secured transactions law, bankruptcy priorities, and commercially negotiated security interests — creditors will press for clarity on whether and how existing perfected security interests are displaced.
The statute’s immediate attachment at conviction, rather than at final judgment collection, also creates a window where property rights are encumbered before appellate finality is achieved; the escrow requirement for appeals mitigates immediate transfers but does not resolve potential constitutional challenges about pre-final deprivation.
Operationally, the State and the Attorney General face a heavy tracing and valuation task. The statutory reach extends to converted proceeds, sales, exchanges, and assets whose market value partly stems from notoriety or unique knowledge.
Proving that a specific asset’s value derives from criminal conduct — and quantifying the portion attributable to that conduct — will require forensic accounting, expert valuation, and likely protracted litigation. Likewise, claims against third-party transferees will force courts to parse bona fide purchaser defenses, familial gifts, and inter-jurisdictional asset movements.
The statute also leaves unanswered procedural details: how courts compute victim damages in lien enforcement proceedings, how the AG will prioritize which assets to pursue, and what standards apply to the “computed cost” charges for confinement and supervision.
Try it yourself.
Ask a question in plain English, or pick a topic below. Results in seconds.