Beats
Lacks transparency. Publishes some details, but doesn't show its workers are paid and treated fairly.
Last researched 3 November 2026 · 6 sources
Apple-owned audio brand selling headphones, earbuds and speakers.
There's no proof Beats pays more than the legal minimum, which in China is below a living wage, and it doesn't name the factories its Responsible Business Alliance audits cover.
Know something we've missed? Send evidence. Represent Beats? Send a right of reply.
Compare Beats with another brand
Why it's graded Lacks transparency
- Not met: Meets 1 of 6 Good requirements.
- Holds the grade back: It has 3 red flags: no evidence of a living wage, unaudited production in high-risk countries and untraced high-risk mined materials. Two or more red flags means a poor grade.
- It isn't Harm on record, because there's no serious confirmed problem on its record.
- Lacks transparency is still a poor grade: in supply chains like this, workers who can't be seen to be treated fairly are usually underpaid or unprotected.
Good requirements 1 of 6
- Not met: Pays a living wage, or holds a strong fair-pay certificationLiving wage: no evidence
- Not met: Respects worker rightsMost of its products are made in countries such as China and Malaysia, where unions are heavily restricted, and it has no full supply chain audit.
- Not met: Supply chain independently audited or certified, or at least 80% made in countries with strong labour standards
- Met: No confirmed child or forced labour findings or linksUnconfirmed reports of forced and child labour are listed below. They don't affect the grade.
- Not met: Names the factories or farms that make its products, or is fully certified by a scheme that holds and audits that list
- Not met: Traces its cobalt, gold and other conflict minerals to the mine
Red flags 3
- Red flag: No evidence it pays a living wage
- Red flag: Made mostly in countries with poor worker rights, without a full independent audit of its supply chain
- Red flag: Relies on high-risk mined materials it can't traceShown to explain the grade. It isn't one of the 2 red flags that set it.
- Red flag: Fails its category's raw-material check (means Lacks transparency)
Stars it would earn as Good
None yet. Stars only show on Good companies. About stars
Where it's made
Product labels show Vietnam. Press and retailer reports name China. The rest is shown as where electronics are usually made.
| Country | Worker rights | Legal minimum wage | Forced labour risk |
|---|---|---|---|
| China | No guarantee of rights | Below a living wage | Moderate |
| Vietnam | Systematic violations | Well below a living wage | Moderate |
| TaiwanUsual for the industry | Strong protections | Close to a living wage | Low |
| MalaysiaUsual for the industry | No guarantee of rights | Below a living wage | Moderate |
| South KoreaUsual for the industry | No guarantee of rights | Close to a living wage | Low |
| IndiaUsual for the industry | No guarantee of rights | Well below a living wage | High |
Evidence
What we found
- Risk across the industry, not a finding about this company: cobalt, tin, tantalum, tungsten and gold mining carry child and forced labour risk (DR Congo, Indonesia), and assembly overtime is widespread.
- Modern slavery statement
- Relies on metals such as cobalt, gold and tin from artisanal mines where miners, including children, face toxic dust, mercury exposure and deadly tunnel collapses. It hasn't shown any steps to trace these materials to the mine, so it's graded Lacks transparency until it does.
Research notes Beats products are made by contract manufacturers in China and Vietnam (Powerbeats Pro 2 is labelled made in Vietnam); no country shares or Beats-specific factory list are published. Beats sits under Apple's supply chain programme, including its RBA membership, supplier code, audits and modern slavery statement, but Apple does not report Beats suppliers or audit results separately. No living wage commitment is made.
What independent sources say
| Source | Result | Details |
|---|---|---|
| Australian Modern Slavery Register | Listed | Parent company Apple Pty Limited lodged a 2025 modern slavery statement under the Australian Act. View |
Unconfirmed reports
Credible reports that haven't been confirmed by a regulator, completed investigation or the company. They're shown for your information and don't affect the grade.
- China Labor Watch reported excessive hours, heavy use of dispatch workers and lost overtime pay at Foxconn's Zhengzhou iPhone plant, a parent company Apple supplier not tied to Beats products (China Labor Watch, 2025). Source
- Apple's own 2026 supplier report found recruitment fees charged to workers and underage workers at some Apple suppliers; the report covers Apple's supply chain overall and does not single out Beats (Apple, 2026). Source
- International Rights Advocates sued Apple in Washington DC under the city's consumer protection law, saying Apple's marketing hides that its cobalt, tin, tantalum and tungsten are linked to child and forced labour in DR Congo; Apple calls the claims baseless (Engineering News, 2025). Source
Sources and actions
Sources 6
Show all 6 sources
- China Labor Watch on Foxconn iPhone 17 factory (2025) · search the archive · Alleged long hours and dispatch labour at an Apple iPhone supplier.
- Apple Pty Limited Modern Slavery Statement 2025 (Australian Register) · search the archive · Apple's Australian modern slavery statement for July 2024 to June 2025.
- Apple buys Beats Electronics: how the China sourcing paid off (Examine China) · search the archive · Beats headphones and speakers are produced in China; Apple bought Beats in 2014.
- Beats Powerbeats Pro 2 product listing (Dien May Xanh) · search the archive · Powerbeats Pro 2 listed as made in Vietnam.
- Apple Supplier Code of Conduct and Supplier Responsibility Standards (2025) · search the archive · Apple supplier code, drawn from the RBA Code of Conduct, applies to suppliers providing goods to Apple.
- US group sues Apple over Congo conflict minerals (Engineering News, 2025) · search the archive · Lawsuit alleging Apple minerals linked to child and forced labour in DR Congo; Apple denies.
Company details
- Owned by
- Apple Inc. (bought 2014)
- Headquarters
- United States
- Last researched
- 3 November 2026
- Cite this page
- Labour Lens, "Is Beats ethical? Labour rating", https://www.labourlens.net/brand/beats, last researched 3 November 2026, accessed [date].
- Method
- Researched with AI assistance against published rules. How we check · What Lacks transparency means
Other TV and audio brands
Nothing we've rated in TV and audio is better than Lacks transparency yet.
Something missing or wrong?
Grades are opinions based on the evidence listed here. Send us evidence, or a right of reply if you represent Beats.