In applying the forfeiture provisions of RICO, three troublesome issues have been encountered: (1) whether RICO forfeiture applies to the fruits and profits of racketeering activity; (2) the point in time at which the Government acquires its right of forfeiture; and (3) whether, when the defendant has disposed of the forfeited property between the time of the crime and indictment, the statute requires tracing of forfeited property to its present form, or whether the statute is better effected by allowing the Government a choice of remedies. Under the latter approach, the Government may either trace the property or require the defendant to satisfy the forfeiture order out of other assets on hand. Regarding the first issue, it can be concluded that RICO was intended to reach the monetary proceeds of racketeering activity. This conclusion is supported by the history and language of RICO. Further, the forfeiture is intended to apply from the time of the RICO violation. This conclusion is also supported by the history and language of the statute, with further support supplied by case law. Regarding the third issue, the Government should not be required to trace the forfeited property. Rather, it should be allowed to choose any of the traditional remedies available to a judgment debtor, including tracing. A total of 136 footnotes are provided. (Author summary modified)