Claims assessment · Product/entity claim
Sweatshop-free
Typical treatment across five regimes. Every verdict below is tied to a stated legal hook.
Market comparison
How this claim is typically treated
Five major markets · one reviewed comparison
| Market | Typical treatment | Legal basis | What is required |
|---|---|---|---|
| European UnionEU | Conditional | Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD)Empowering Consumers Directive (EmpCo)Forced Labour Regulation View legal reasoningUCPD; CSDDD/FLR context for large cos | Absolute claim requires audited supplier base; third-party social audits across manufacturing tiers. |
| United KingdomUK | Conditional | View legal reasoningCMA Code; MSA s.54 consistency | Audit evidence; consistency with modern-slavery statement. |
| United StatesUS | Conditional | View legal reasoningFTC Act s.5; UFLPA for XUAR-linked goods | Supplier audit trail; import-screening records. |
| CanadaCA | Conditional | Competition Act greenwashing provisions (Bill C-59)Fighting Against Forced Labour and Child Labour in Supply Chains Act View legal reasoningCompetition Act s.74.01(1)(b.1); Supply Chains Act s.11(3) | Audit evidence aligned with filed supply-chain report. |
| AustraliaAU | Conditional | View legal reasoningACL s.18; MSA s.16 consistency | Audit trail; consistency with Modern Slavery Statement. |