In March 2020, Ethical Consumer searched the Fung Group's website for a cotton sourcing policy. Although the company's subsidiaries sold a range of products which included cotton, no policy could be found.
According to Anti-Slavery International (ASI) website viewed by Ethical Consumer in August 2018, Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan were two of the world’s largest exporters of cotton, and every year their governments forcibly mobilised over one million citizens to grow and harvest cotton. Due to the high proportion of cotton likely to have come from Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan and the prevalence of forced labour in its production, the company lost half a mark in the Workers Rights category.

The Organic Trade Association website, www.ota.com, stated in July 2018 that cotton covered roughly 2.78% of global arable land, but accounted for 12.34% of all insecticide sales and 3.94% of herbicide sales. Due to the impacts of the widespread use of pesticides in cotton production worldwide the company lost half a mark in the Pollution & Toxics category.

According to the International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-Biotech Applications (ISAAA), a non-profit pro biotech organisation, genetically modified cotton accounted for 80% of cotton grown in 2017. Due to the prevalence of GM cotton in cotton supply chains and the lack of any evidence that the company avoided it, it was assumed that some of the company's cotton products contained some GM material. As a result it lost half a mark under the Controversial Technology category.
Overall the company received Ethical Consumer's worst rating for its cotton sourcing policy.

Reference:

https://www.funggroup.com (11 March 2020)

In March 2020, Ethical Consumer searched the Meiyume website and could not find any information or statement regarding the company's approach to GM ingredients. As GM ingredients are somewhat likely to be used in the sectors that Meiyume's brands operate, cosmetics, the company lost half a mark under the category Controversial Technologies.

Reference:

https://www.meiyume.com/ (11 March 2020)

In March 2020, Ethical Consumer viewed the 2018 Annual Report for Li & Fung, which stated that three directors had received remuneration over $2million. Ethical Consumer considered amounts over £1million to be excessive. As such the company lost half a mark under Anti-Social Finance.

Reference:

Li & Fung AR 2018 (11 March 2020)

In March 2020, Ethical Consumer viewed the family tree for Li & Fung on the corporate database D&B Hoovers. This stated that Li & Fung was registered in Bermuda.

It also had a holding company in Bermuda, and it had mutiple subsidiaries in other known tax havens such as the British Virgin Islands and Hong Kong.

An internet search using the search terms “Li & Fung 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.

As the company had more than two high-risk subsidiaries based in tax havens, and the parent company was also based in a tax haven, it received Ethical Consumer's worst rating for likely tax avoidance strategies and lost a whole mark under Anti-Social Finance.

Reference:

Generic Hoovers ref (2020)