The tracker · United Kingdom
While the current UK Modern Slavery Act mandates annual statements but lacks strict content standards or penalties—leading buyers to mistakenly blame the law for their rigorous supplier data requests—a June 2026 bill aims to tighten these rules toward stricter EU-style due diligence duties.
Government introduced section 54 amendments via the Immigration and Asylum Bill on 30 June 2026, moving toward a more prescriptive regime.
In plain language
Under Section 54 of the UK Modern Slavery Act, large companies must publish an annual statement detailing their efforts to identify, prevent, and mitigate modern slavery in their supply chains. However, this mandate acts more as a transparency exercise than a strict regulatory standard. The law allows immense flexibility, meaning a company can legally comply even if its statement explicitly admits that no action was taken. Furthermore, there is no regulatory body assigned to audit these reports, nor are there financial penalties for publishing vague or weak disclosures. If a company fails to publish a statement altogether, a court's only recourse is to issue an injunction forcing them to produce one; it cannot punish the business for the actual content of the report.
Because the statutory threshold is so low, a significant disconnect has emerged between what the law requires and what the market demands. Corporate buyers frequently ask their suppliers for extensive compliance documentation, often incorrectly claiming that UK law forces them to do so. In reality, the legislation establishes almost no baseline for mandatory due diligence. When buyers impose these heavy reporting requirements, they are typically driven by internal corporate risk policies or the pressure to comply with stricter international frameworks—such as the EU's regulations—rather than genuine UK legal obligations.
This purely disclosure-based environment may soon change. In June 2026, the UK government introduced a new bill designed to tighten these rules and introduce actionable due diligence duties. While the bill has not yet passed, this legislation signals a clear move toward the European Union's more rigorous compliance model, which would fundamentally shift the legal obligations for UK companies and their global supply chains.
Obligations
Covered organisations must publish a board-approved, director-signed statement on their website with a prominent link.
The statutory guidance recommends covering structure, policies, due diligence, risk assessment, effectiveness and training, though content remains formally optional.
Timeline
Act received Royal Assent.
Independent review recommended substantial strengthening of section 54.
House of Lords committee found the act no longer world-leading and urged due diligence legislation.
Government response and consultation kept reform options open without a bill.
Government introduced amendments to section 54 within the Immigration and Asylum Bill, strengthening reporting requirements ahead of a promised standalone due diligence law.
Changelog
Reform debate status refreshed following ministerial statements.
Exposed export value at full application, across the ten tracked origins · Figures come from UN Comtrade. For each country we use what its buyer markets reported importing, rather than what the country itself reported exporting, because several tracked countries report to Comtrade late or not at all. Every share is measured against that country's exports to the nine regulated markets this index tracks, not against its total exports to the world, because no reliable world total exists for countries that under-report. European Union figures add up all twenty seven member states. The European product breakdown by chapter is estimated from the four largest importers, Germany, France, the Netherlands and Italy, and scaled up to the full twenty seven member total, so it captures which products dominate without understating any single one. · methodology
Sources