EU Forced Labour Regulation Guidelines: What Businesses Need to Know  

This blog was originally posted on 23rd July, 2026. Further regulatory developments may have occurred after publication. To keep up-to-date with the latest compliance news, sign up to our newsletter.

AUTHORED BY CRISTIAN BARROSO, REGULATORY COMPLIANCE SPECIALIST, ADHERENT

---

The EU Forced Labour Regulation (EU) 2024/3015 marks a major step in the global fight against forced labour in global supply chains. Although it entered into force on 13 December 2024, most of its provisions will not become applicable until 14 December 2027, giving businesses time to prepare.

On 26 June 2026, the European Commission published the Regulation’s implementation guidelines through the Single Forced Labour Portal. Although not legally binding, the guidelines provide the clearest indication of how the Regulation will be applied and enforced in practice. Therefore, this blog breaks down the main practical implications for businesses.

Table of Contents

• What’s the Regulation’s Scope?
• Initial Assessment: Risk-Based Screening
• Preliminary and Formal Investigation
• Decision and Enforcement
• Conclusion

What’s the Regulation’s Scope?

The Regulation applies to all businesses operating in the EU market regardless of size, location or sector. It prohibits them from selling, importing and exporting products made with forced labour at any stage of extraction, harvesting, production or manufacturing.  

The ban applies to all products, including their components, irrespective of their value or whether they are supplied in a business-to-business or business-to-consumer context.

Importantly, products offered for sale online or by distance selling are deemed available on the EU market where the offer targets end-users within the EU, even if the products have not been “actually” placed on the market.

Does the Regulation Introduce Additional Due Diligence Obligations?

No. The Regulation does not, per se, introduce additional due diligence obligations on businesses. Instead, it establishes an obligation of “result” by prohibiting the placing, making available, or export of products made with forced labour. 

That said, the Regulation expressly recognises due diligence as an essential tool for preventing forced labour in supply chains, as well as an essential element that competent authorities will consider when assessing the company’s conduct during an investigation.

For this reason, the Guidelines devote a substantial chapter to recommended due diligence practices. While these recommendations are not, as such, legally binding, they provide businesses with practical guidance on how to build effective due diligence systems.

Recommended Due Diligence for Economic Operators

The Guidelines build on the OECD’s globally recognised six-step due diligence framework, and translate it into practical actions that companies can implement throughout their operations and supply chains. While the Guidelines identify key expectations, they also emphasise that due diligence should be tailored to each company’s particular circumstances and context. 

Companies are therefore encouraged to embed due diligence into their policies, governance structures and risk management systems. These measures should reflect local contexts, sector-specific risks and operational circumstances, and must be developed in consultation with relevant stakeholders. Economic operators should also communicate their policies and expectations to suppliers and other business partners, and prioritise sourcing from suppliers that demonstrate responsible business conduct.

Likewise, a recommendation is made to companies to undertake a broad scoping exercise to identify actual and potential forced labour risks of their operations and business relationships. Where risks are identified, businesses should carry out an in-depth assessment proportionate to the severity and likelihood of risks, the company’s level of involvement and its available resources. 

Moreover, companies should implement measures to manage and respond to such risks.  Where risks arise through business relationships, companies should use their leverage to encourage suppliers and other business partners to prevent, mitigate, or cease harmful practices. This may involve collaborative engagement, capacity-building, contractual requirements, or other appropriate measures. 

The effectiveness of these measures should be reviewed on an ongoing basis. Monitoring should extend beyond the company’s own operations to include periodic assessments of business partners and suppliers, enabling businesses to determine whether risk-mitigation measures remain effective or require adaptation. 

The Guidelines further encourage companies to publicly communicate information about their forced labour due diligence processes, including their approach to remediation measures adopted in cooperation with business partners and suppliers.

Finally, where companies have caused or contributed to forced labour impacts, they should provide for or cooperate in remediation through legitimate processes. The extent of the companies’ remediation depends on their level of involvement. Where a company is directly linked to forced labour through a business relationship but has neither caused it nor contributed to the harm, it should use its influence to encourage business partners to provide effective remediation. 

Depending on the circumstances, remediation could include restitution, rehabilitation, compensation, internal accountability or disciplinary measures, and satisfaction actions.

Investigation and Enforcement

The Guidelines detail the investigation and enforcement procedure to be carried out when products are suspected of having been made with forced labour to uphold the prohibition. 

The EU Commission and/or competent national authorities, as applicable, will have the power to investigate suspected violations and eventually detain, seize, or order the withdrawal or disposal of a product made with forced labour, as well as apply the corresponding penalties. 

The investigative process consists of five stages: 

1. Initial Assessment
2. Preliminary Phase
3. Formal Investigation
4. Decision
5. Enforcement

Initial Assessment: Risk-Based Screening

When assessing the likelihood of violation of the law, deciding to initiate and conduct an investigation, and identifying the products and commercial entities concerned, the competent authorities must follow a risk-based approach. This assessment must be based on “all relevant, factual, and verifiable information”, taking into consideration:

• The scale and severity of the suspected forced labour, including for example on the number of indicators, the difficulty of remediation, duration of practices and whether they are systemic. 
• The quantity or volume of products placed or made available in the EU, together with their monetary value;
• The proportion or parts of the product likely to have been made with forced labour; and
• The proximity of economic operators to the suspected forced labour risks in their supply chain, as well as their size, economic resources and supply chain complexity.

Preliminary and Formal Investigation

Where the competent authority identifies a likelihood of a violation of the forced labour ban, it may initiate the preliminary phase of an investigation. During this phase, the authority may request information and has 30 working days to decide whether a “substantiated concern” justifies opening a full investigation.

This phase provides economic operators with an opportunity to explain how they identify, prevent, mitigate and address forced labour risks in their supply chains for the products under assessment, or to demonstrate why the authority’s concerns are not relevant to those products. 

If a formal investigation is opened, the competent authority may request additional information from economic operators and conduct field inspections. Economic operators would be required to respond to information requests within 30 to 60 working days. Although not legally binding, investigations should, as a benchmark, be completed within nine months of their initiation. 

The Guidelines emphasise that the lead competent authority bears the burden of proof. Accordingly, the evidentiary threshold should reflect the administrative nature of the forced labour ban rather than the higher standards applicable in criminal proceedings.

An important takeaway from the guidelines is the indicative list of documentation examples that competent authorities may request from economic operators when assessing the likelihood of the violation. This may include:

• Corporate policies, codes of conduct, and governance documents.
• Procurement and supplier policies, contracts, and training materials.
• Sectoral risk assessments and due diligence reports.
• Product identification details (e.g. brand name, model, batch or serial number, CN codes, and digital product passport information).
• Bills of materials and certificates of origin.
• Product traceability records.
• Supply chain mapping and identification of key actors.
• Facility location data.
• Transactional and logistics records.
• Evidence of working conditions such as photos, videos, conversation notes, employee agreements, contracts, among others.
• Production processes and capacity information. 
• Social audit reports provided they were conducted under conditions that ensured workers were not under threat, constant surveillance or management supervision, and where auditors had unrestricted access to production facilities; otherwise, these are not considered credible. 

It is important to note that individuals, associations and other stakeholders may submit information and supporting evidence via the Single Information Submission Point.

Decision and Enforcement

Where competent authorities conclude that a product has been made in violation of the forced labour ban, their decisions may prohibit the product from being placed or made available on the EU Market, order the withdrawal of products already on the market, the withdrawal of products already made available and require their disposal.  

The decisions apply not only to the economic operator named in the decisions but also to any business that subsequently places or makes available the banned product on the EU market.

Products that have already reached end-users are exempt from the withdrawal. However,  any disposal must comply with the waste hierarchy established in the EU Waste Framework Directive. As a general rule, products should be recycled wherever possible and, where recycling is not feasible, rendered inoperable. For apparel, clothing accessories, and footwear, destruction may be permitted in accordance with Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2026/296, which establishes derogations from the general prohibition on the destruction of unsold consumer products. In all cases, disposal must not confer any benefit on the economic operator concerned. 

Overall responsibility for enforcing the prohibition on products made with forced labour, rests with the competent authority; nonetheless, customs authorities shall also enforce the decisions regarding products entering or leaving the EU. 

The Regulation does not impose penalties for violating the forced labour ban itself. Rather, they apply where an economic operator fails to comply with an enforcement decision.

Conclusion

The Guidelines clarify that companies are expected to demonstrate that they have implemented proportionate, risk-based human rights due diligence systems supported by credible evidence to comply with the Regulation’s objective of preventing forced labour in product supply chains.

For companies that are still developing their human rights due diligence capabilities, understanding the Regulation requirements is an important first step. Businesses should use the period before the Regulation becomes applicable in December 2027 to strengthen governance, improve supply chain traceability, and embed forced labour risk management into their day-to-day operations.

See Adherent in Action

Discover how agentic AI is reshaping product compliance for global enterprises.

Book a Demo