Sharp
Lacks transparency. Publishes some details, but doesn't show its workers are paid and treated fairly.
Last researched 2 November 2026 · 7 sources
Osaka electronics maker selling microwaves and appliances.
Sharp's supply chain was linked to forced labour in 2019, and there's no proof it pays more than the legal minimum, which in China is below a living wage.
Know something we've missed? Send evidence. Represent Sharp? Send a right of reply.
Compare Sharp with another brand
Why it's graded Lacks transparency
- Not met: Meets 1 of 6 Good requirements.
- Holds the grade back: It has 4 red flags: no evidence of a living wage, unaudited production in high-risk countries, forced or child labour and untraced high-risk mined materials. Two or more red flags means a poor grade.
- It isn't Harm on record: the most serious problem on its record (forced labour link, last recorded in 2019) is more than 5 years old.
- 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
- Not met: No child or forced labour findings or links
- Met: Names the factories or farms that make its products, or is fully certified by a scheme that holds and audits that listMakes its products in its own factories
- Not met: Traces its cobalt, gold and other conflict minerals to the mine
Red flags 4
- Red flag: No evidence it pays a living wageShown to explain the grade. It isn't one of the 2 red flags that set it.
- Red flag: Made mostly in countries with poor worker rights, without a full independent audit of its supply chain
- Red flag: Forced, slave or child labour found in or linked to 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
From Sharp's own disclosure: it makes its products in its own factories. Its list covers only part of its range. 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 |
| Malaysia | No guarantee of rights | Below a living wage | Moderate |
| Japan | Strong protections | Close to a living wage | Low |
| Thailand | No guarantee of rights | Below a living wage | Moderate |
| Indonesia | No guarantee of rights | Well below a living wage | Moderate |
| Philippines | No guarantee of rights | Well below a living wage | Moderate |
| Poland | Regular violations | Close to a living wage | Moderate |
| United Kingdom | Regular violations | Close to a living wage | Low |
| France | Regular violations | About a living wage | Low |
| United States | Systematic violations | Below a living wage | Low |
| TaiwanUsual for the industry | Strong protections | Close to a living wage | Low |
| 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.
- Owns or runs its own production
- 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 Sharp makes most of its products in its own factories in Japan, China, Malaysia, Thailand, Indonesia, Vietnam, the Philippines, Poland, the UK, France and the US, but gives no country shares. It joined the Responsible Business Alliance in 2021; its FY2024 survey of suppliers covering 80% of spending found 35 low-rated sites and no serious forced or child labour, but these are self-assessments and no third-party audit results or supplier list are published. There is no living wage commitment.
What independent sources say
| Source | Result | Details |
|---|---|---|
| UK Modern Slavery Statement Registry | Listed | Sharp Electronics Europe publishes UK Modern Slavery Act statements; it reports no specific audit results or cases. View |
| Business & Human Rights Resource Centre | Problem found | Records Sharp in ASPI's 2020 Uyghur labour transfer report and the 2018 dismissal of foreign supplier workers at its Mie plant. View |
| Baptist World Aid Ethical Fashion Report | Listed | Graded C- in Baptist World Aid's 2016 Electronics Industry report. View |
Confirmed issues 1
Only confirmed problems are listed, and old ones drop off after 10 to 15 years. A problem the company has fully put right no longer counts against it, and nor does one it finds and is fixing itself. How problems are counted
| Last recorded | What happened | Made amends? |
|---|---|---|
| 2019 | Link through a supplierThe Australian Strategic Policy Institute named Sharp among 83 brands linked to Chinese factories using Uyghur workers transferred from Xinjiang in conditions strongly suggesting forced labour (ASPI via BHRRC, 2020). Source · search the archive | Not knownNo response from Sharp is recorded in BHRRC's coverage of the report. |
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.
- Good Shopping Guide cites China Labor Watch finding excessive hours, mandatory overtime and verbal abuse at factories supplying Sharp (China Labor Watch, 2023). Source
- A union reported that about 2,900 foreign workers employed by suppliers at Sharp's Mie plant in Japan were dismissed after Sharp cut orders; Sharp said they were not its employees (BHRRC, 2018). Source
Sources and actions
Sources 7
Show all 7 sources
- Sharp Australia (Good Shopping Guide) · search the archive · BWA 2016 C-; RBA member; cites ASPI 2020 and China Labor Watch 2023
- Japan: Sharp suppliers fire 2,900 foreign workers (BHRRC, 2018) · search the archive · Foreign supplier workers at Sharp's Mie plant dismissed after order cuts; Sharp declined to comment
- Major brands implicated in report on forced labour beyond Xinjiang (BHRRC, 2020) · search the archive · ASPI 2020 report lists Sharp among 83 brands
- Promoting Supply Chain CSR (Sharp) · search the archive · Joined RBA in December 2021; annual self-assessment surveys of suppliers covering 80% of spending
- Sharp ISO 14001 certified sites (2024) · search the archive · Sharp production companies in Japan, China, Malaysia, Thailand, Indonesia, Vietnam, Philippines, Poland, UK, France and US (Sept 2024)
- Harvey Norman: Sharp brand page · search the archive · Harvey Norman stocks Sharp appliances in Australia
Published by Sharp or its owner
- Sharp Electronics of Canada: Report on Forced and Child Labour (2026) · search the archive · FY2024: 960 supplier sites surveyed, 35 low-rated, no serious forced or child labour found; RBA member since Dec 2021
Company details
- Headquarters
- Japan
- Last researched
- 2 November 2026
- Cite this page
- Labour Lens, "Is Sharp ethical? Labour rating", https://www.labourlens.net/brand/sharp, last researched 2 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 Sharp.