In February 2021 Ethical Consumer searched The Nature's Bounty website and found that some supplement products were listed as being "non-GMO" but not all. There was a search filter under View All Products, Dietary Restrictions that allowed you to select "I'm Non GMO". This reduced the number of products from 203 to 123. This implied that other products contained GMOs (genetically modified organisms). The company lost half a mark under Controversial Technologies.

In February 2021 Ethical Consumer viewed the lobbying information website, opensecrets.org, which stated that in the 2020 election cycle KKR was connected to donations of $1,882,980 in political contributions to both Democrats and Republicans. 53.29% of this went to the Republicans and 44.20% to the Democrats. NOTE: The organization itself did not donate, rather the money came from the organization's PACs, their individual members or employees or owners, and those individuals' immediate family members. Organizations themselves cannot contribute to candidates and party committees. Totals include subsidiaries and affiliates.
It had also spent $1,660,000 on lobbying in 2019 with 25 out of 35 KKR & Co lobbyists in 2019 being said to have previously held government jobs.
As a result the company lost a whole mark under Political Activities.

According to the organisation's website bilderbergmeetings.org, viewed by Ethical Consumer in February 2020, Petraeus, David H. (USA), Chairman, KKR Global Institute, had been a participant at the May-June 2019 Bilderberg Meeting. The Bilderberg Group was regarded by Ethical Consumer as an international corporate lobby group which exerted undue corporate influence on policy-makers in favour of market solutions that were potentially detrimental to the environment and human rights. As a result the company lost half a mark under Political Activities.

In February 2021 Ethical Consumer viewed the Coty inc page on the information website opensecrets.org. Coty was listed as having given $29,015 to US political parties during the 2020 election cycle. Of this 87.29% went to the Democrats, 9.85% to independents and 2.86% to Republicans.
The website noted that "Organizations themselves cannot contribute to candidates and party committees. Totals include subsidiaries and affiliates." No spending was listed for lobbying.
As a result the company lost half a mark under Political Activities.

In February 2021 Ethical Consumer viewed KKR & Co Inc's annual filing form 10-K (2019) to the US Securities and Exchange Commission. According to the executive compensation table, the following total payments were made to executives in 2019:

Henry R Kravis: $40,122,617
George R Roberts: $40,165,377
Joseph Y Bae: $34,972,589
Scott C Nuttall: $35,212,129
William J Janetschek: $2,251,426
David J Sorkin: $6,461,433

Ethical Consumer considered payments over £1 million to be excessive. KKR therefore lost half a mark under Anti-Social Finance.

Since 2016 Nature's Bounty no longer filed on sec.gov.
According to the 2016 annual 10k filing with the US Securities and Exchange Commission the company paid two of its executives over $1.5million: Steven Cahillane earned over $6.5million and Brian Wynne over $2.5million. Ethical Consumer deemed any annual salary over $1.5 million per year was excessive. The company therefore lost half a mark under the Anti-Social Finance category.

In February 2021 Ethical Consumer viewed the Coty Inc's compensation table in the company's DEF 14A SEC filing with the SEC, US. It stated that the CEO, Pierre Laubies, received $21,660,857 in 2020. Five other staff members were also shown to have been paid over $4 million in 2020. Ethical Consumer deemed any remuneration over £1million to be excessive.

As a result, Coty Inc lost half a mark under Anti-Social Finance.

In February 2021 Ethical Consumer viewed KKR's SEC Filing Form 10-K (Exhibit 21.1) for the year ending December 2019. It contained a list of subsidiaries. The vast majority of these, numbering in their hundreds, were located in jurisdictions which Ethical Consumer considered to be tax havens. Including Delaware (US), Singapore, Hong Kong, Luxembourg, Mauritious, Ireland, Jersey and the Cayman Islands. Many of these were also high risk company types (namely holding companies) for the likely use of tax avoidance. For example:

8 Sigma Capital Holdings Pte. Ltd. (Singapore)
EIGF TE GP Resource Holdings GP I LLC (Delaware)
KKR CIP Holdings Limited (Cayman Islands)
KKR Europe V Holdings Limited (Cayman Islands)
KKR Europe V Holdings LLC (Delaware)
Furthermore the companies UHC was incorporated in Delaware despite being headquartered in New York.

An internet search using the search terms “KKR tax policy statement country” found no country-by-country financial information or reporting (CBCR).
The company did have a UK Tax Strategy Statement dated December 2020. It stated "We analyse, and may avail ourselves of, tax incentives or exemptions to the extent they may be available in a particular case in order to mitigate tax expense to the extent legally possible in order to enhance value to our investors and unitholders. However, even where tax incentives or exemptions may be available, we still may not pursue them to the extent their use may carry with it significant reputational risk to our investors, stakeholders or KKR, or if there would be a risk of damaging our relationship with HRMC". This was not considered to be clear public tax statement confirming that it was this company’s policy not to engage in tax avoidance activity or to use tax havens for tax avoidance purposes nor was there a narrative explanation for what each group entity located in a tax haven was for, demonstrating that it was not being used for purposes of tax minimisation.

Given that KKR had its UHC, as well as multiple high risk company types, located in jurisdictions on Ethical Consumer's tax haven list and no country-by-country financial information, nor adequate policy statement and narrative explanation, the company received Ethical Consumer's worst rating for likely use of tax avoidance strategies and lost a whole mark under Anti-Social Finance.

A report published by Citizens for Tax Justice in October 2016 criticized US tax policy on large multinational corporations. Many multinational corporations used accounting tricks to pretend for that a substantial portion of their profits were generated in offshore tax havens, countries with minimal or no taxes where a company’s presence could be as little as a mailbox.

The study examined the use of tax havens by Fortune 500 companies in 2015. It revealed that tax haven use was ubiquitous among America’s largest companies and that a narrow set of companies benefited disproportionately.

Amongst these companies KKR was named as one of the 'Top 20 Companies with the Most Tax Haven Subsidiaries'.
It was found to maintain 300 subsidiaries in the following tax havens: Cayman Islands (249), Channel Islands (6), Hong Kong (3), Ireland (19), Luxembourg (9), Mauritius (5) and Singapore (9).

Neither the overall rate of the tax paid on this overseas cash, nor any estimate of the US tax avoided, were disclosed.

In February 2021 Ethical Consumer viewed Coty Inc.'s list of subsidiaries on the D&B Hoovers corporate database. This showed that the company had a number of subsidiaries in jurisdictions considered by Ethical Consumer to be tax havens at the time of writing. These were Hong Kong and Jersey. Of these, one was a holding company, which was a high risk company type for likely use of tax avoidance: LION/GLORIA TOPCO LIMITED in Jersey
Ethical Consumer also viewed Coty's SEC Filing Form 10-K (2020) which stated that it was incorporated in Delaware, also a tax haven, despite being headquartered in New York. This was considered a very high risk company structure for the likely use of tax avoidance strategies.
An internet search using the search terms “Coty tax policy statement country” found no country-by-country financial information or reporting (CBCR), nor clear public tax statement confirming that it was this company’s policy not to engage in tax avoidance activity or to use tax havens for tax avoidance purposes, including a narrative explanation for what each group entity located in a tax haven was for demonstrating that it was not being used for purposes of tax minimisation. A UK tax strategy was found which stated "Accordingly, we expect to pay tax on income in the country where activities take place with the caveat that double taxation of the same activity by different jurisdictions should be avoided" but did not provide an explanation of its high risk company structure.
Given that Coty Inc. had two or more high risk subsidiaries in jurisdictions on Ethical Consumer's tax haven list and no country-by-country financial information, nor adequate policy statement and narrative explanation, the company received Ethical Consumer's worst rating for likely use of tax avoidance strategies and lost a full mark under Anti-Social Finance.