Personal care, especially fragrances
Company Ownership
Coty Australia Pty Ltd
AUS
Coty Inc
owns 100% of Coty Australia Pty Ltd
USA
Beauty products
Following the merger with Proctor & Gamble's Specialty Beauty Business in 2016, Coty is the third-largest beauty company in the world. German consumer goods giant Joh. A. Benckiser GmbH acquired Coty in 1996.
JAB Holding Company SARL
owns 60% of Coty Inc
LUX
Holding company
Owned by four siblings from one of Europe's wealthiest and most private families, the Reimanns. The company is run my three CEOs, who collectively own about 8% of JAB. Owns controlling stakes in beauty business Coty, coffee giant JDE Peet's, beverages giant Keurig Dr Pepper and Krispy Kreme Doughnuts, among others.
Company Assessment
(Last updated Aug 2024)
Praise
Criticism
Information
Coty Australia Pty Ltd
Praise
Criticism
Information
This company received the highest packaging performance level of 5 (Beyond Best Practice) in its 2024 APCO Annual Report. Australian Packaging Covenant Organisation (APCO) is a not-for-profit organisation leading the development of a circular economy for packaging in Australia. Each year, APCO Members are required to submit an APCO Annual Report and Action Plan, which includes an overall performance level from 1 (Getting Started) to 5 (Beyond Best Practice).
Source: APCO
(2024)
This company has been criticised for offensive advertising. In 2016 the Advertising Standards Bureau upheld complaints about a cinema ad by this company on the grounds that it breached advertising codes. The ad was subsequently discontinued or modified.
Coty Inc
Praise
Criticism
Information
In 2023, the Carbon Disclosure Project (CDP) asked companies to provide data about their efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and mitigate climate change risk. Responding companies are scored across four key areas: disclosure; awareness; management; and leadership. This company received a CDP Climate Change score of B.
Source: CDP
(2023)
America's Most Responsible Companies 2022 by Newsweek and Statista recognises the Top 500 most responsible companies in the United States. Companies were evaluated in three areas: environmental (waste, energy use, etc.), social (leadership diversity, employees and philanthropy) and governance (transparency and economic performance). This company received a total score of 69.6/100, ranking 31st in the Consumer Goods sector, and 339th overall.
Source: Newsweek
(2021)
Forest 500 identifies the 350 companies and 150 financial institutions with the greatest exposure to tropical deforestation risk, and annually assesses them on the strength and implementation of their deforestation and human rights commitments. This company received a score of 15.9%.
Source: Forest 500
(2023)
As You Sow's 2024 Plastic Promises Scorecard measures the corporate ambition and action of 225 large companies across six industries on six core pillars of plastic packaging pollution prevention: 1) Recyclability, 2) Reduction, 3) Recycled Content, 4) Recovery, 5) Reuse, and 6) Producer Responsibility. This company received a grade of F.
Source: As You Sow
(2024)
This company appears on PETA's (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, USA) 'Companies That Do Test On Animals' list, signifying that they manufacture products that are tested on animals at some stage of development.
Source: PETA
(2022)
JUST Capital polls Americans every year to identify the issues that matter most in defining just business behaviour. For their 2024 rankings the public identified 20 issues, which are organised under the headings Workers, Communities, Customers, Shareholders and Environment. JUST Capital then define metrics that map to those issues and track and analyse the largest, publicly traded U.S. companies. This analysis powers their rankings, in which this company ranked 766th of 937 companies, and 9th of 10 Personal Products companies.
Source: JUST Capital
(2024)
This company received an S&P Global ESG Score of 19/100 in the Personal Products category of the S&P Global Corporate Sustainability Assessment, an annual evaluation of companies' sustainability practices (last updated 7 Feb 2021). The rankings are based on an analysis of corporate economic, environmental and social performance, assessing issues such as corporate governance, risk management, environmental reporting, climate strategy, human rights and labour practices.
Source: S&P Global
(2021)
This company scores Ethical Consumer's worst rating for their use of palm oil, signifying they are using no or minimal certified palm products, and with no or minimal positive commitments.
Source: Ethical Consumer
(2022)
The PalmOil Scan app, produced by the World Association of Zoos and Aquariums (WAZA), rates companies on their commitment to sourcing sustainable palm oil. Companies are scored on their use of certified sustainable palm oil (CSPO), commitment to sourcing CSPO, on-the-ground conservation action, and membership to the RSPO. Companies can earn a rating of Excellent, Good, Poor or No Commitment. This company is rated "Poor" (retrieved 18 Nov 2023).
Source: WAZA
(2023)
The 2024 Social Benchmark assesses the world's 2,000 most influential companies on their responsibility in meeting society's fundamental expectations towards three measurement areas: respecting human rights, providing decent work, and acting ethically. This company was assessed in 2024 and received a score of 6/20. The average score was an alarmingly low 4.6/20 and the highest score was 15.5/20.
As You Sow's 2021 report, 'The 100 Most Overpaid CEOs', reveals the 100 most overpaid CEOs from USA's 500 largest public companies (as determined by the S&P 500 list). This company's CEO, Pierre Laubies came in at number 22 on the list, having been paid US$16,211,992 in 2020. According to the report, "Most CEOs have come to be grossly overpaid, and that overpayment is harmful to the companies, the shareholders, the customers, the other employees, the economy, and society as a whole."
Source: As You Sow
(2021)
The Nature Benchmark ranks 816 companies across 20 industries on their efforts to protect our environment and its biodiversity. Companies were assessed in three phases between 2022 and 2024 using three measurement areas: governance and strategy; social inclusion and community impact; and ecosystems and biodiversity. This company was assessed in 2024 and is ranked #339/816, with a total score of 16.6/100.
This company uses plastic microbeads in some of its personal care products. These particles are not retained by wastewater treatment so end up in the ocean where they contribute to ocean plastic pollution, and are hazardous to sea life. While the effects of microplastics on human health are not completely understood, there are concerns about plastic additives, such as phthalates, which are known endocrine disruptors which are shown to have harmful effects on life.
Source: Beat the Microbead
(2021)
In 2022 the median pay for a worker at this company was US$38,853. The CEO was paid 92 times this amount. Exorbitant CEO pay is a major contributor to rising inequality. CEOs are getting more because of their power to set pay, not because they are increasing productivity or possess specific, high-demand skills. The economy would suffer no harm if CEOs were paid less (or taxed more). In contrast, the CEO-to-typical-worker compensation ratio was 20-to-1 in 1965 and 58-to-1 in 1989.
Source: AFL-CIO
(2023)
In 2016 Greenpeace East Asia ranked the world's 30 biggest personal care companies on their commitment to eliminating microbeads from their personal care products. The scorecard was based on four main criteria: commitment & transparency, definition, deadline and global application. This company ranked joint second. Microbeads are not retained by wastewater treatment and end up in the ocean where they are a threat to the marine environment.
Source: Greenpeace
(2016)
As listed on the We Mean Business website, this company has committed to the following climate action initiatives: commit to 100% renewable power.
Source: We Mean Business
(2021)
This company is a member of the Responsible Beauty Initiative, an industry initiative focused on sustainable procurement. It was founded in 2017 to improve sustainability throughout the entire beauty supply chain, through sharing best practices and processes, driving a common understanding across the industry, and to use and share common tools, creating efficiencies.
Source: Ecovadis
(2023)
This company is a member of the Responsible Mica Initiative, a Do-Tank which aims to eradicate child labour and unacceptable working conditions in the Indian mica supply chain by joining forces across industries.
California, the UK and Australia have all enacted legislation requiring companies operating within their borders to disclose their efforts to eradicate modern slavery from their operations and supply chains. Follow the link to see this company's disclosure statement.
Source: company website
(2016)
OpenSecrets.org tracks the influence of money on U.S. politics, and how that money affects policy and citizens' lives. Follow link to see this company's record of political donations, lobbying, outside spending and more.
Source: Open Secrets
(2020)
JAB Holding Company SARL
Praise
Criticism
Information
The Business Benchmark on Farm Animal Welfare (BBFAW) 2023 Report ranks global food companies on their farm animal welfare policies, practices and performance. This company appeared in tier 6, "No evidence on the business agenda", with tier 1 being the best, and tier 6 the worst.
Source: BBFAW
(2023)
This company received an S&P Global ESG Score of 1/100 in the Diversified Financial Services and Capital Markets category of the S&P Global Corporate Sustainability Assessment, an annual evaluation of companies' sustainability practices (last updated 7 Feb 2021). The rankings are based on an analysis of corporate economic, environmental and social performance, assessing issues such as corporate governance, risk management, environmental reporting, climate strategy, human rights and labour practices.
Source: S&P Global
(2021)
As listed on the We Mean Business website, this company has committed to the following climate action initiatives: adopt a science-based emissions reduction target.
Source: We Mean Business
(2021)
This article about Coty's failed 2012 bid to buy Avon discusses the history of Joh A Benckiser and its owners, the Reimann family, one of Europe's wealthiest and most private families.
Source: news article
(2012)
Company Details
Type:
Wholly-owned subsidiary
Revenue:
243 million AUD
(2023)
Employees:
120
(2023)
Contact Details
Address:
Level 31, 1 Market St, Sydney, NSW, 2000, Australia
Phone:
02 9267 5500
Freecall:
1800 812 663
Website:
Products / Brands
Coty Australia
adidas
Fragrances
adidas
Mens Grooming
Adidas
Deodorant
Airbrush Legs
Tanning Lotions
Baby Phat
Fragrances
Balenciaga
Fragrances
Beyonce
Fragrances
Bourjois
Cosmetics
Celine Dion
Fragrances
Cerruti
Fragrances
Chopard
Fragrances
Covergirl
Cosmetics
David Beckham
Fragrances
David Beckham
Mens Grooming
Davidoff
Fragrances
Gucci
Fragrances
Gwen Stefani
Fragrances
Halle Berry
Fragrances
Jennifer Lopez
Fragrances
Jil Sander
Fragrances
Joop!
Fragrances
Jovan
Fragrances
Kate Moss
Fragrances
Kylie Minogue
Fragrances
Lacoste
Fragrances
Lagerfeld
Fragrances
Lancaster
Fragrances
Max Factor
Cosmetics
Nautica
Fragrances
Nikos
Fragrances
NYC - New York Colour
Cosmetics
Phat Farm
Fragrances
Playboy
Deodorant
Playboy
Mens Grooming
Rimmel
Cosmetics
Sally Hansen
Nail Care
Sally Hansen
Cosmetics
Sally Hansen
Tanning Lotions
Sarah Jessica Parker
Fragrances
Vidal Sassoon
Shampoo
Hugo Boss
Fragrances
Burberry
Fragrances
Vivienne Westwood
Fragrances
Vera Wang
Fragrances
Marc Jacobs
Fragrances
Kenneth Cole
Fragrances
Chloe
Fragrances
Calvin Klein
Fragrances