No update was found when searched in November 2020. In March 2020, Ethical Consumer viewed Hain Celestial's Sustainability Report 2018.
It stated:"Non-Genetically Modified Organisms (Non-GMO): A GMO, or genetically modified organism, is a plant, animal, microorganism, or other organism whose genetic makeup has been modified in a laboratory using genetic engineering or transgenic technology. This creates combinations of plant, animal, bacterial, and virus genes that do not occur in nature or through traditional crossbreeding methods. At Hain Celestial, we have committed to transparency and have supported legislation calling for the labeling of GMOs in food products. According to the Non-GMO Project, more than 60 countries around the world, including Australia, Japan, and countries in the European Union require GMOs to be labeled. Globally, there are also 300 regions with outright bans on growing GMOs. At Hain, approximately 700 of our products are verified non-GMO"

While this was considered positive the company also sold meat and dairy not labelled organic. Due to the prevalence of GMOs in animal feed Ethical Consumer expected companies to have a clear policy restricting GMO animal feed as well as GMO ingredients.

The Hain Celestial Group lost half a mark under Controversial Technologies.

In November 2020, Ethical Consumer searched the Hain Celestial website. The company produced sunscreen under a few brands including Jason, Alba Botanica, Avalon. Sunscreen was an area in which nanotechnology was very common. Ethical Consumer considered nanotechnology to be a technology that carried potential environmental and health risks, and had not yet been
sufficiently established as safe.

The following statement was found in the company's 2018 Sustainability report: "the following materials or classes of materials should not be included in the raw material composition:" The list included nanoparticles.

As it stated it did not use nanotechnology, the company was not marked down and this reference is for information only.

In November 2020, Ethical Consumer viewed the entry for Hain Celestial on the Opensecrets.org website, which was published in the USA by the Centre for Responsive Politics. This stated that in 2020 the company was linked to $10,174 in political donations. Of this, some was donated to Republican candidates and some to Democrats. NOTE: OpenSecrets states: “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.”
The company lost half a mark under Political Activities.

In November 2020, Ethical Consumer viewed Hain Celestial Group's SEC Filing Form DEF 14A which contained information on director pay.
It stated that in 2020 three executives had been paid annual compensation exceeding £1,000,000.
As Ethical Consumer considered these sums to be excessive, Hain Celestial lost half a mark under Anti-Social Finance.

In November 2020, Ethical Consumer viewed Hain Celestial Group Inc's Annual Report 2020 (SEC filing form 10K). The company was found to be incorporated in Delaware, a jurisdiction considered to be a tax haven by Ethical Consumer at the time of writing, while the company's correspondence address was in New York.

Hain Daniels Group's, (Hain Celestial Group's UK arm) Annual Accounts 2019 also stated that its immediate parent company was Hain Celestial Jersey Limited, a company incorporated in Jersey. Jersey was also considered to be a tax haven at the time of writing.

An internet search using the search terms “Hain Celestial tax policy statement country” found no country-by-country financial information or reporting (CBCR). The company's UK tax policy was viewed. It stated a principle: "to comply in full with the letter and the spirit of all relevant tax laws that apply in the UK and in any territory in which the Group has any operations’". This was not considered to demonstrate a 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. There was also no narative explanation found as to why it had its UHC incorporated in Delaware and the UK holding company incorporated in Jersey.

As Hain Celestial's UHC was incorporated in a tax haven, as well as having one other high risk subsidiary located in a tax haven, it recieved Ethical Consumer's worst rating for the likely use of tax avoidance strategies and lost a full mark in the Tax Conduct category.