Fast-fashion giant Shein under investigation over misleading practices: 'Shein should have to pay'
Shein is now the most popular fast-fashion brand in the world. The brand launched in 2008 as other fast-fashion brands, like H&M and Forever 21, were dressing millennials in college.
The combination of the rise of TikTok, as recounted by the BBC, and the lack of in-person shopping became its recipe for success in 2020. It grew over 1000% between 2019 and 2023, raking in over $32.5 billion in 2023 alone.
Shein has been making headlines for its attempts to list itself on the New York Stock Exchange and London Stock Exchange. However, there has been pushback on both due to concerns about links to China and the company's ESG practices.
Multiple organizations have launched investigations or made accusations about Shein's corporate behavior, Sustainability Magazine revealed. The Italian Competition Authority launched an investigation into Shein regarding its misleading advertising claims regarding sustainability, Greenpeace shined a light on the irresponsibility of producing disposable clothing, and there was backlash regarding labor standards at some of its factories.
Since these accusations, Shein has created a Global External ESG Advisory Board and Regional Strategy and Corporate Responsibility Committees, donated $5.3 million to the Africa Collect Textiles Foundation, launched collections using deadstock materials, and developed a new polyester recycling process.
However, many people are saying that this is a drop in the bucket compared to the damage the brand does every year.
"Assuming that carbon dioxide emissions were Shein's only negative externality and assuming that Shein had to pay $100 per metric tonne of carbon dioxide, then its $5.3 million donation represents 1/3 of 1% of what Shein should have to pay humanity for the societal costs of its annual carbon dioxide emissions," Ken Pucker, Professor of the Practice at The Fletcher School at Tufts University, wrote on his social media, according to Sustainability Magazine.
Shein started off 2025 by appointing a new global head of sustainability, Mustan Lalani.
"The scale and complexity of this challenge are immense, but so is the opportunity to set a new standard for sustainability in the industry," he shared in a LinkedIn post. His goal is to reduce Shein's pollution by 25% by 2030, according to Sustainability Magazine.
What should the government do about the fast fashion industry?
Set strict regulations
Incentivize sustainable options
Use both regulations and incentives
Nothing
Click your choice to see results and speak your mind.
However, Shein launches 2,000 to 10,000 new pieces on its site every day and emitted 18.4 million tons of carbon dioxide in 2023 alone, according to Shein's Sustainability and Social Impact Report. While 25% would be great for a smaller company, Shein needs to take more responsibility for its environmental impact — from its use of textiles to its labor practices.
It's important to educate yourself more about greenwashing so you can spot it in the wild. You can also make a difference by thrifting instead of buying new, repairing clothing instead of discarding, and unfollowing brands that are not transparent about ESG practices.
Join our free newsletter for good news and useful tips, and don't miss this cool list of easy ways to help yourself while helping the planet.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
4 hours ago
- Yahoo
Musk Lashes Out After Bannon Calls to Deport Him Amid Trump Fight
Elon Musk spent his evening calling Steve Bannon a 'retard' after Bannon called for Trump to seize Musk's companies and deport him following their fallout over the budget bill. Musk and Trump had a highly publicized spat on Thursday that saw the president expressing his 'disappointment' in Musk's opposition to his 'big, beautiful bill' on live TV, chalking the conflict up to Musk losing his government Tesla subsidies. The Silicon Valley right came to Musk's side, while Bannon and the deep MAGA right rallied around their leader. 'He doesn't know anything. He's a know-it-all. He knows some engineering, don't get me wrong, but he doesn't know anything about the real world,' Bannon said of Musk on his Thursday show. 'Any fanboys that still exist … understand that DOGE, he didn't find any fraud. There's plenty of fraud out there. This is President Trump's first complaint. Was this all BS with the DOGE?' Bannon continued. 'Space X … President Trump should be taking immediately. When he threatens to take one of the big programs out of Space X, President Trump tonight should sign an executive order calling for the defense production act and seize Space X tonight before midnight,' Bannon said, responding to Musk's threats to pull his Space X programs from the Trump administration. 'They should initiate a formal investigation of his immigration status, because I am of the strong belief that he is an illegal alien, and he should be deported from the country immediately,' Bannon later said to The New York Times, adding that he told Trump the same thing. Multiple tech bros came to Musk's defense on X and the world's richest man popped up in their replies to voice his agreement, calling Bannon multiple variations of 'retard.' Musk called Bannon 'peak retard' and a 'communist retard' multiple times on X. Bannon and Musk have been at odds since the H-1B visa fight, which underscored the ideological rifts within Trump's base that are fully coming into fruition now. Bannon is the core of MAGA, resonating deeply with a right-wing populist base. Musk was simply a quick, messy fling, which he is now realizing—and not handling very well.
Business Journals
4 hours ago
- Business Journals
Delaware's 2025 DGCL amendment
In March 2025, Delaware enacted significant amendments to the Delaware General Corporation Law (DGCL). These amendments, enacted through Senate Bill 21 (SB 21) and signed into law by Gov. Matt Meyer on March 25, 2025, substantively modify the safe harbor provisions for interested transactions and refine the scope of stockholder inspection rights. We analyze these critical changes and their practical implications for Delaware corporations, their boards and stockholders. Background and context The amendments were passed by the Delaware legislature in response to a concerning trend of corporations redomesticating to other states. The law took effect immediately upon the governor's signature and represents Delaware's proactive effort to maintain its position as the premier state for corporate domicile by providing greater statutory clarity in areas previously defined primarily through case law. Section 144: Comprehensive safe harbor framework Defining the 'controlling stockholder' The amendments provide a statutory definition of a 'controlling stockholder' as one who: Owns or controls a majority of voting stock entitled to vote in director elections Can appoint directors with majority voting power, or Has equivalent control by holding at least 33.33% of the corporation's voting stock and managerial authority over the corporation Three distinct safe harbor paths The amendments establish differentiated approval requirements for interested transactions based on the specific conflict scenario: 1. Majority interested board safe harbor For transactions involving a majority interested board, the amendments provide a safe harbor from both equitable relief and damages liability through either: Approval by an independent committee comprising at least two disinterested directors, or Approval or ratification by a majority of the votes cast by disinterested stockholders Notably, the director safe harbor no longer requires conditioning approval before the start of substantive economic negotiations, though the board must determine all committee members are disinterested. For stockholder approval, the 'votes cast' standard replaces the previous 'outstanding' shares standard. 2. Conflicted controller/non-go-private transactions For transactions where a controlling stockholder has a conflict but is not taking the company private: Safe harbor is available through either: Approval by an independent committee comprising at least two disinterested directors, or Approval or ratification by a majority of the votes cast by disinterested stockholders This effectively overrules prior case law requiring both protections for such transactions. 3. Conflicted controller / go-private safe harbor For transactions where a controlling stockholder is taking the company private: Safe harbor requires both: This codifies the dual-protection framework from Kahn v. M&F Worldwide Corp. (MFW) while eliminating the 'ab initio' requirement that these protections be implemented before the start of substantive economic negotiations. Enhanced protection for public company directors The amendments create a strong presumption that directors of public companies are disinterested and independent if they meet stock exchange independence definitions. This presumption: Does not apply if the director is a party to the transaction Can only be rebutted by 'substantial and particularized facts' The amendments also limit controller liability to breaches of loyalty or improper benefits, shielding controlling stockholders from damages for breaches of the duty of care in their capacity as controllers. Section 220: Refining stockholder inspection rights Statutory definition of 'books and records' The amendments provide a statutory definition of 'books and records' to establish clearer boundaries for stockholder inspection rights, including: Enhanced requirements for inspection SB 21 also institutes more structured requirements for books and records inspections: Demands must be conducted in good faith Proper purpose must be described with reasonable particularity Requested records must be specifically related to the stockholder's proper purpose Additionally, the amendments codify that corporations can impose reasonable confidentiality restrictions, limiting the use and distribution of inspected records and redacting irrelevant information. Limited expansion provision Unlike the original bill, the enacted amendments permit the inspection of materials beyond those covered by the 'books and records' definition if a stockholder: Makes a showing of a compelling need for inspection to further a proper purpose, and Demonstrates by clear and convincing evidence that such specific records are necessary and essential to further such purpose This balanced approach is designed to preserve meaningful inspection rights while providing companies with greater certainty about the scope of potential demands. Practical implications For corporate governance: Strategic flexibility in transaction planning: The amendments provide multiple pathways to cleanse conflicted transactions based on the nature of the conflict, enhancing flexibility in transaction structuring. Greater certainty for boards: The presumption of independence for public company directors who meet exchange requirements reduces litigation risk in board decision-making. Protection for controllers: Limiting controller liability to breaches of loyalty or improper benefits shields controlling stockholders from damages for breaches of the duty of care. Streamlined approval processes: Removal of the 'ab initio' requirement and other timing constraints allows more practical implementation of protective measures. For transaction planning: Clearer standards: The 33.33% threshold for controlling stockholder status provides a bright-line rule. Tailored approval paths: Different cleansing options based on transaction type allow more efficient governance approaches. Special committee requirements: Committees must include at least two directors determined to be disinterested and fulfill their duty of care. Modified stockholder approval standard: The shift to a 'votes cast' standard from 'outstanding shares' may make stockholder approval more attainable. For stockholder rights: More defined inspection scope: The statutory definition of 'books and records' provides both corporations and stockholders with greater clarity. Balanced protection: While defining limits to inspection rights, the amendments preserve access to additional records when stockholders can demonstrate compelling need. expand To learn more about King & Spalding's global M&A practice, please visit With nearly 140 years of service, King & Spalding is an international law firm that represents a broad array of clients, including half of the Fortune Global 100, with 1,300 lawyers in 24 offices in the United States, Europe, the Middle East and Asia. Rob Leclerc works with publicly traded and private companies as well as private equity firms to execute mergers and acquisitions, strategic investments, joint ventures and other complex transactions. Leclerc is a partner in our Mergers and Acquisitions and Corporate Governance practices. Zack Davis specializes in representing issuers and underwriters in a variety of capital markets activities in the U.S. and abroad. He also advises a number of public companies in connection with governance issues, SEC reporting and disclosure requirements and other corporate and securities matters.
Yahoo
5 hours ago
- Yahoo
Administrators lined up for UK arm of Microsoft-backed Builder.ai
Administrators are on standby to handle the collapse of the UK arm of a Microsoft-backed start-up which has filed for bankruptcy protection in the US. Sky News has learnt that Alvarez & Marsal (A&M) has been lined up to oversee the insolvency of UK entities. News of the impending appointment comes days after which was founded by Sachin Dev Duggal, collapsed in the US. Money latest: Mr Duggal stepped down earlier this year. had raised hundreds of millions of dollars from investors, including a Qatari sovereign wealth fund, helping it to achieve a 'unicorn' valuation of more than $1bn. The company said it used artificial intelligence to make the process of building an app "as easy as ordering pizza". In recent weeks, however, media outlets including the Financial Times have alleged the company used potentially bogus sales figures to attract investment. Read more from Sky News: The newspaper also reported that Mr Duggal had sounded out potential backers to buy the business out of insolvency proceedings. It was unclear on Friday whether any meaningful assets remained within UK corporate entities. A spokesman for A&M declined to comment.
