Giorgio Armani Australia
Luxury goods importer
All Giorgio Armani products sold in Australia are imported as pre-packed from their directly owned or outsourced production facilities in Hong Kong, China and Italy.


Owned ITA
Rating C
About the Ratings

Company Ownership

Giorgio Armani Australia Pty Ltd
Giorgio Armani SpA
owns 100% of Giorgio Armani Australia Pty Ltd
Fashion and luxury goods
Italian fashion house founded by Giorgio Armani in 1975.

Company Assessment

Giorgio Armani Australia Pty Ltd
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)
Giorgio Armani SpA
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)
The 2023 Fashion Transparency Index reviewed 250 of the world's largest fashion brands and retailers and ranked them according to how much they disclose about their human rights and environmental policies, practices and impacts. Brands owned by this company scored 38%, signifying it is publishing suppliers lists as well as detailed information about their policies, procedures, social and environmental goals, supplier assessment and remediation processes, and is more likely to be addressing issues such as living wages and collective bargaining. The average score was 26% and the highest score was 83%.
The Green Supply Chain Corporate Information Transparency Index (CITI) evaluates consumer-facing companies that have a sizeable supply chain in China. The evaluation uses government supervision data and public information to assess the environmental management of their supply chains in China. This company received a score of 15.7/100 (retrieved 24 Nov 2023).
Source: IPE (2023)
The 2020 Sustainable Cotton Ranking, published by WWF, Solidaridad and the Pesticide Action Network UK analysed the 77 largest cotton users among international apparel brands and retailers, reviewing their policies, actual uptake of more sustainable cotton and transparency in their supply chains. According to the report, this company is "not yet started" with a score of 0%. The average score was 18.2% and the highest score was 79.2%.
Greenpeace launched their Detox Campaign in 2011 to expose the direct links between global clothing brands, their suppliers and toxic water pollution around the world. As a result, many companies have joined Greenpeace's Detox Program, which requires companies to adopt a credible, individual and public commitment to phase out the use and release of all toxic chemicals from their global supply chain and products, by 1 January 2020. This company is yet to make a commitment despite pressure from Greenpeace.
A 2014 report by China Labour Watch found poor working conditions in a Chinese factory that mainly manufactures cosmetic brushes for multinational beauty companies, including this one. Labor abuses include excessive overtime and poor worker safety measures. Also, the factory has not purchased social insurance for workers as required by law. Hundreds of workers went on strike in Jan 2014 after a female team leader was slapped by a male manager. [Listed under Information due to age of report]
The Apparel and Footwear Supply Chain Transparency Pledge (Transparency Pledge) helps demonstrate apparel and footwear companies' commitment towards greater transparency in their manufacturing supply chain. Transparency of a company's manufacturing supply chain better enables a company to collaborate with civil society in identifying, assessing, and avoiding actual or potential adverse human rights impacts. This is a critical step that strengthens a company's human rights due diligence. This company is not aligned with the Transparency Pledge and has made no commitment to publish supplier factory information.
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.
This company has publicly banned sandblasting. Sandblasting is a dangerous and deadly process which involves workers firing sand at jeans under high pressure. It has been known to kill workers within months as the inhalation of large amounts of silica dust generated during sandblasting causes silicosis, a potentially lethal pulmonary disease.
This company has announced that they don't sell animal fur or are phasing in a fur-free policy.
This company is a member of The Fashion Pact, a global initiative of companies in the fashion and textile industry (ready-to-wear, sport, lifestyle and luxury) including their suppliers and distributors, all committed to a common core of key environmental goals in three areas: stopping global warming, restoring biodiversity and protecting the oceans.
Business & Human Rights Resource Centre digital platform presents news and allegations relating to the human rights impact of over 20,000 companies. Their enhanced Company Dashboards also include financial information, key data points based on corporate policies, and scores from prominent civil society benchmarks. Follow the link and use the search function to view this company's dashboard.

Company Details

Wholly-owned subsidiary
40.6 million AUD (2019)
176 (2019)

Contact Details

Level 1 Challis House, Sydney, NSW, 2000, Australia

Products / Brands