Sustainability in Supply Chain > Supplier Due Diligence and Capacity Building

On-Site Audit

Our dedicated team consisting of RBA-certified auditors1) conducts on-site audits of our suppliers. To thoroughly inspect the work environments at our supplier sites, we review their documents, including wage records, contracts, and policies. As part of our efforts to engage both their working-level staff and managers in our audits, we conduct interviews with selected employees2) to pinpoint any workplace issues and formulate remediation plans. We manage all identified issues, including human rights matters, through the Purchasing System. We record risk grades and detailed audit findings in the System once the management and employees who participated in the audits confirm the accuracy of the results. We require each supplier to submit its improvement plan and subsequent results, which are then reviewed collaboratively by our respective country and regional managers along with the supplier.

We guide suppliers to take immediate remedial actions on site whenever possible. For other standard non-conformances, we monitor whether they have taken remedial actions generally within three months from the submission of the improvement plans. For matters that require extended time and significant expenses over a longer term, such as facility installation and certification, we track the progress and improvement based on the submitted plan. Suppliers that fail to correct serious violations identified during the initial audit, such as restricting freedom of movement, utilizing unfair employment contracts, or improperly protecting juvenile workers, will be subject to mandatory third-party audits the following year. More importantly, if a supplier is found to have committed critical human rights violations, including child labor and forced labor, we require immediate remedial actions and impose strict penalties in its comprehensive evaluation.

We also operate a specialized working-hour monitoring function within the Purchasing System to ensure our suppliers comply with our labor requirements. Through this system, we record the monthly average and maximum working hours of our suppliers’ employees at each business site and rate the seriousness of any non-compliance. In 2025, DX Division conducted on-site audits of all 357 key suppliers3) using the RBA assessment criteria and implemented corrective actions, resulting in a final compliance rate of 95%. Meanwhile, DS Division audited 30 suppliers of Samsung China Semiconductor (SCS) Corporation and carried out necessary remediation, achieving a final compliance rate of 99%.

Starting in 2024, we introduced on-site audits of second-tier suppliers, carried out by our key first-tier suppliers, and have been continuously increasing the number of audit targets. To support this program, we developed and distributed a specialized audit toolkit aligned with Samsung Electronics’ standards and provided training for first-tier suppliers. Guided by our criteria for selecting key suppliers, first-tier suppliers identified key second-tier suppliers and conducted on-site audits for more than 400 of them in 2025.

  • Applicable to DX Division
  • Scope : workforce equal to or greater than the square root of the total employee count
  • Key suppliers refer to those whose transaction volumes or proportions exceed a certain threshold, thereby having a significant impact on our business

Special Audits on Child Labor

Samsung Electronics has a zero-tolerance policy towards child labor. To prevent suppliers from employing child labor, we have conducted annual special audits since 2015 during middle school and high school vacations, when child labor recruitment is likely to occur. Since 2018, we have expanded these audits to certain second-tier suppliers. To assess potential or actual risks, we gather comprehensive data by reviewing recruitment postings and policies, verifying identities, and conducting employee interviews.

2025

Samsung Electronics audited 131 first-tier suppliers, 71 in DX Division and 60 in DS Division, and 30 second-tier suppliers in East Asia. None of these suppliers employed child labor. However, four suppliers had deficiencies in their recruitment processes, including the lack of facial recognition systems and the failure to collect identity verification pledges. These suppliers have since taken measures to improve upon these deficiencies.

2024

Samsung Electronics audited 133 first-tier suppliers, 67 in DX Division and 66 in DS Division, and 32 second-tier suppliers in East Asia. None of these suppliers employed child labor. However, six suppliers had deficiencies in their recruitment processes, including a lack of facial recognition protocols for identification and insufficient student worker protection policies in contracts. These suppliers have since taken measures to improve upon these deficiencies.

2023

Samsung Electronics audited 112 first-tier suppliers, 50 in DX Division and 62 in DS Division, and 32 second-tier suppliers in East Asia. None of these suppliers employed child. However, three suppliers had deficiencies in their recruitment processes, including a lack of facial recognition protocols for identification. These suppliers have since taken measures to improve upon these deficiencies.

Conducted twice a year in winter and summer, the number of suppliers may overlap between the time periods.


In 2023, we reported policy, process, due diligence activities and plans, and improvement cases to Samsung Compliance Committee to eradicate child labor in our company and suppliers. 

Special Audits on Forced Labor Involving Migrant Workers

The Samsung Electronics Supplier Code of Conduct prohibits suppliers1) from using forced labor and bans the exaction of recruitment fees from migrant workers. If a migrant worker pays such a fee, the supplier must reimburse the worker within 90 days. We monitor fees and costs in all recruitment processes by communicating with supplier management and employees. This oversight is applied throughout the selection of new suppliers, regular audits including self-assessments, on-site audits, and third-party audits, as well as special audits on forced labor.

Audit findings related to recruitment fees for migrant workers are classified as serious forced labor cases, on par with child labor and working-hour violations. Suppliers risk a downgrade in their assessment rating of comprehensive evaluations or even transaction termination, in severe cases, if they fail to resolve these issues.

In 2025, we conducted special audits on forced labor within all countries where key suppliers employing migrant workers are located. A total of 47 suppliers in five countries—Malaysia, Thailand, Poland, Hungary, and Slovakia—were audited using the Specialty Validated Assessment Program (SVAP), RBA’s specialized forced labor program. The audits assessed 22 items, including audits of recruitment agencies, possession of recruitment agency contracts by first-tier suppliers, recruitment fee reimbursement, local language contracts and pay stub provisions, pre-departure introductory training, remediation procedures and record-keeping. Following the audit of the recruitment agency contracts, results revealed that the suppliers used 70 agencies in 16 countries2) to recruit migrant workers.

Initially, all of these 47 suppliers demonstrated a fairly strong average compliance rate of 96%. However, a non-conformance was identified at two suppliers in Thailand, where two employees had been charged recruitment fees. These suppliers reimbursed the affected workers a total of $960. From 2017 through 2025, our efforts ensured the reimbursement of $1,223,081 in recruitment fees to 1,939 migrant workers across 12 countries, including Bangladesh, Nepal, and Vietnam. An analysis of annual reimbursements shows a continued decline in recruitment fees, reflecting a decrease in the hiring of migrant workers by our suppliers.

In addition, we confirmed 45 audit findings, including the absence of victim remediation procedures, the lack of recruitment fee policies, and the lack of due diligence on recruitment agencies. To resolve these issues, we collaborated with local subsidiaries to support monthly status improvements, ultimately confirming that all audit findings had been addressed and remediated.

  • Based on the International Labour Organization’s (ILO) core conventions No. 29 (Forced Labour Convention) and No. 105 (Abolition of Forced Labour Convention), etc.
  • Sending countries: 35 agencies across 12 countries (Nepal, Myanmar, Cambodia, Bangladesh, Serbia, Uzbekistan, Ukraine, Kazakhstan, Philippines, India, Romania, Poland); Receiving countries: 35 agencies across five countries (Malaysia, Slovakia, Hungary, Thailand, Poland).
This table summarizes the number of violations and key issues identified across 15 special audit items for migrant workers.
Item Number 
of
findings
Key finding details
Prohibition of recruitment fees 10 Insufficient policy enforcement and delays in worker reimbursements
Provision of travel costs and means within region 2 Transportation costs not provided
Return transportation costs 2 Incomplete records of return transportation payments
Prohibition of debt and deposits 1 Inadequate management standards
Job posting 1 Insufficient information in job postings
Employment contract 12 Insufficient information in employment contracts
Contract understanding 1 Contract not provided in native language
Pre-departure employment contract 1 Pre-departure employment contract not concluded
Prohibition of changes to terms of employment contract 1 Terms changed after employment contract
Storage safety 1 Inadequate standards for worker document storage
Medical procedures 2 Incomplete training on medical procedures
Acceptance of health permits 1 Absence of related policies
Recruitment service contracts 1 Deficiencies in contract content
Due diligence on recruitment agencies 4 Not performed
Victim remediation 5 No remediation policies in place

Special Audits on Apprentices in India

Samsung Electronics introduced a "Special Interview on Apprentice Working Conditions" in 2025 for nine of the sixteen key suppliers in India that employ apprentices, to protect apprentice workers. Based on the guidelines of "Samsung Guidelines for Apprenticeship Training in India" the interview focused on 13 key areas, including overtime, night shift, and guaranteed rest periods. The assessments revealed no critical violations. However, five non-conformances were identified at two suppliers, specifically regarding a lack of trainee identification protocols for overtime pre-approvals and the failure to guarantee paid leave and statutory rest periods. While one supplier successfully improved its procedures through ongoing collaboration with Samsung Electronics and completed the necessary trainee education, the other supplier demonstrated insufficient progress in guaranteeing paid leave and statutory rest periods. Consequently, the latter has been mandated for a third-party audit in 2026 for more rigorous oversight.

Last updatedJune 26, 2026