Decarba

Key Findings

• Economic: Decarba’s disclosed operator is Netherlands-based Vendify Commerce B.V.; no public evidence identified of Israeli or settlement sourcing, investment, operations, offices, or revenue exposure.^{1, 2}
• Corporate structure: Vendify Commerce B.V. operates multiple Decarba storefronts, while Pasano Collection is also operated by Vendify; available records do not establish a parent-subsidiary relationship, beneficial ownership, or an Israel-linked controller.^{1, 3}
• Political: No public evidence identified of Israel-Palestine statements, lobbying, anti-BDS advocacy, political donations, conflict-period assistance, or settlement activity by Decarba or Vendify.^{4, 5}
• Not found: No public evidence identified of Israeli military, security, surveillance, digital, defence-prime, or state-procurement relationships involving Decarba or Vendify.^{6, 7}

Target Profile

Key Facts:

• Decarba is marketed as a civilian streetwear brand, including “Designed in Amsterdam” / “Designed in Europe” positioning.^{8, 9}
• Legal pages identify Vendify Commerce B.V. as operator across multiple Decarba regional storefronts.¹
• Pasano Collection is also operated by Vendify Commerce B.V.; this shared operator does not by itself establish a corporate-group relationship.¹²
• Secondary trademark-record reproductions report Vendify as proprietor of Decarba and DCRB marks for clothing and online clothing-retail services; official EUIPO-record confirmation was not available in the research transport.^{13, 14}

Executive Summary

Decarba is documented as a direct-to-consumer streetwear and apparel retailer operating through regional and domain-variant online storefronts. The available legal disclosures identify Vendify Commerce B.V., at Nimrodstraat 13 in Tilburg, Netherlands, as the relevant operator for multiple Decarba storefronts. The reviewed evidence supports a Dutch ecommerce and clothing-retail nexus, rather than an Israeli operational nexus.^{1, 8, 9}

The strongest documented corporate facts concern operator identity and a limited shared-brand relationship. Vendify Commerce B.V. is also identified as operator of Pasano Collection. Secondary KVK-derived records describe LCOM Holding B.V. as Vendify’s general director from 2024, but the available material does not establish that LCOM is Vendify’s shareholder, parent, beneficial owner, or controller. Nor does it establish the full identity or role of “Hoogendijk, L.”^{3, 11, 12}

No public evidence identified of Decarba or Vendify sourcing from Israel or settlements; operating offices, stores, warehouses, employees, registrations, investment, revenue, taxation, or commercial activity in Israel or the occupied Palestinian territory; or a verified Israeli parent, shareholder, or controlling principal.^{2, 3} The public record also does not identify Decarba’s suppliers, factories, manufacturing countries, logistics providers, or financial arrangements. A Shenzhen return address documents a China-linked returns route, not manufacturing origin, supplier identity, or a connection to Israel-Palestine.¹⁵

No public evidence identified of contracts, procurement, supply, technical integration, surveillance deployment, or other relationships with Israeli military, security, intelligence, or state bodies. No public evidence identified of Israel-Palestine political statements, lobbying, anti-BDS activity, relevant donations, or settlement operations. Document-scoped checks found no Decarba mention in the reviewed UN and civil-society materials; these findings do not establish universal absence from all databases or future publications.^{4, 6, 7, 16}

On the audited record, Decarba receives a BRS score of 0 and Tier E (Minimal/No Complicity). This is not a finding that every possible supply-chain or ownership fact is publicly known; it reflects that no verified Israel/Palestine nexus was identified across the four assessed domains, and unresolved attribution leads were not treated as evidence of complicity.

Timeline of Relevant Events

Corporate Overview

The available evidence identifies Decarba as a consumer-facing streetwear and fashion retailer. Its storefronts market apparel and footwear and describe a direct-to-consumer retail model. Decarba’s public materials describe products as designed in-house and made with unnamed “trusted production partners”; the public record does not identify suppliers, factories, manufacturing locations, importers of record, logistics providers, or ownership of those production partners.^{8, 18}

Vendify Commerce B.V. is the disclosed operator across Decarba’s German, Dutch, French, Swiss, Decarbastore, Decarbashop, and other reviewed regional storefront disclosures. The legal pages identify a Tilburg address, Dutch registration number 95019731, and VAT number NL866974623B01. This establishes an operator-level legal and operational connection, but does not establish separately incorporated Decarba entities in each market, a complete corporate-domicile history, tax residence, or complete group structure.^{1, 19}

Pasano Collection’s own “About Us” material identifies the same Vendify company number and Tilburg address, establishing that it too is operated by Vendify. The evidence does not establish that Pasano is a Decarba subsidiary, a Vendify subsidiary, or a parent company. Likewise, the reported LCOM Holding B.V. management relationship is not evidence that LCOM is Vendify’s owner or parent.^{3, 12}

Secondary registry-derived sources provide limited corroboration for Vendify’s Dutch internet/mail-order retail profile and report LCOM Holding B.V. as a general director. They are insufficient to resolve shareholding, beneficial ownership, the complete board, controlling natural persons, or LCOM’s precise legal relationship to Vendify. No verified Israeli entity, franchisee, retail operation, office, subsidiary, or settlement-linked outlet was identified.^{2, 3, 11}

Domain Summaries

Military: Military

Mechanism of Involvement

No public evidence identified of a Decarba, Vendify Commerce B.V., or unresolved LCOM Holding B.V. relationship with the Israeli Ministry of Defense, IDF, Israel Prison Service, Israel Border Police, SIBAT, or another Israeli state-security body. The reviewed sources did not identify contracts, tenders, framework agreements, memoranda, procurement listings, defence-exhibition appearances, supply relationships, or public co-belligerency statements.^{6, 7}

Decarba’s documented catalogue consists of civilian streetwear apparel and footwear. No public evidence identified of tactical, ruggedised, mil-spec, security-specific, contract-modified, or dual-use products; sales to Israeli security end-users; export licences; end-user certificates; or export-control proceedings concerning Israeli defence or security users.^{8, 9}

No public evidence identified of Decarba or Vendify manufacturing or supplying weapons, munitions, vehicles, drones, strategic-platform components, construction equipment, engineering services, military logistics, or services to military bases, detention facilities, checkpoints, settlements, or other occupied-territory infrastructure.^{6, 7}

Counter-Arguments and Evidence Limits

The company’s strongest defence is the documented civilian character of its known activity: consumer clothing, footwear, and online retail. The available materials provide no verified defence product, security customer, military contract, or Israeli state procurement relationship. The reviewed public evidence likewise provides no support for a defence-prime supply-chain connection.^{6, 8}

This is an evidence-based finding, not proof that no undisclosed commercial relationship could exist. However, the audit did not identify a factual basis to infer military involvement from the company’s apparel business, shared operator arrangements, or unresolved corporate-management records. LCOM’s reported management role cannot properly be converted into ownership or attributed defence activity without primary evidence.^{3, 11}

The current examiner-adjudicated Military assessment treats the considered material-physical supply scenario as an absence-only finding. No reviewed evidence documents downstream supply, construction, equipment, uniform support, or logistics for an Israeli state-security beneficiary, so the scenario provides no governing act or positive military score. Its hypothetical wording is not an allegation of an actual relationship; the zero reflects this audited record, not a claim that every possible undisclosed relationship has been ruled out.^{6, 8}

Named Entities and Evidence Map

• Decarba / Vendify Commerce B.V.: Civilian apparel and online-retail activity documented; no public evidence identified of Israeli defence or security procurement, supply, logistics, or weapons-system involvement.^{1, 6, 8}
• LCOM Holding B.V.: Secondary sources report a general-director relationship with Vendify; ownership, control, and any Israel-related activity remain unverified.^{3, 11}
• Israeli state-security bodies and defence primes: No public evidence identified of a relationship with Decarba or Vendify.^{6, 7}

Digital: Digital

Mechanism of Involvement

No public evidence identified of Decarba or Vendify licensing, subscribing to, integrating, or outsourcing work to Israeli-origin cyber, surveillance, AI, cloud, intelligence, or enterprise-technology vendors. No public evidence identified of relationships with Israeli state, military, intelligence, or security bodies involving digital services.^{7, 20}

No public evidence identified of facial recognition, biometric identification, behavioural analytics, retail surveillance, loss-prevention analytics, predictive policing, workforce surveillance, AI/ML systems, autonomous systems, offensive-cyber tools, or data-centre infrastructure associated with Decarba or Vendify.²⁰

No public evidence identified of an Israeli R&D office, engineering facility, innovation lab, Israeli subsidiary, Israeli entity registration, Israeli technology acquisition, startup investment, patent portfolio, licensing arrangement, Project Nimbus participation, or comparable Israeli sovereign-cloud engagement.²⁰

Counter-Arguments and Evidence Limits

The strongest defence is that Decarba’s documented public operations are consumer apparel retail, not technology provision. No digital product line, vendor stack, hosting provider, cloud supplier, data-residency arrangement, or technology integrator was publicly disclosed in the reviewed materials. The absence of vendor disclosure does not establish that no ordinary ecommerce technology exists; it does establish that no Israel-linked digital relationship was verified on this record.^{8, 20}

No physical retail footprint was identified in the reviewed materials, further limiting the evidentiary basis for attributing in-store surveillance or retail analytics. The audit does not assume that an ecommerce brand’s use of standard digital infrastructure constitutes an Israeli surveillance or state-security nexus.²⁰

Named Entities and Evidence Map

• Decarba / Vendify Commerce B.V.: No public evidence identified of Israeli-origin technology vendors, surveillance tools, cloud participation, or Israeli state-security digital contracts.^{1, 20}
• LCOM Holding B.V.: No public evidence identified of Israeli cyber, AI, surveillance, or technology investments; identity and ownership attribution remain unresolved.^{3, 11}
• Pasano Collection: Shared Vendify operator established; no evidence that this creates a technology-group relationship or an Israeli digital nexus.^{12, 20}

Economic: Economic

Mechanism of Involvement

No public evidence identified of direct or indirect sourcing from Israeli agricultural exporters, apparel producers, settlement producers, Israeli distributors, white-label suppliers, or other Israeli suppliers. No public evidence identified of Israeli investment, financing, real estate, R&D, tax payments, portfolio holdings, importer-of-record entities, joint ventures, or dedicated regional import structures involving Decarba, Vendify, DCRB, or Pasano Collection.^{2, 21}

No public evidence identified of Israeli offices, warehouses, stores, employees, registrations, government contracts, sales activity, or commercial operations in Israel or the occupied Palestinian territory. The reviewed materials identify a Dutch ecommerce operator and do not support an Israeli economic or settlement-commerce presence.^{1, 2}

Public materials do not disclose manufacturers, supplier identities, countries of production, textile labels, customs documents, bills of lading, or purchase invoices. The US storefront’s Shenzhen return address documents a returns channel only; it does not demonstrate manufacturing origin, supplier identity, or Israel-related commerce.^{15, 18}

Counter-Arguments and Evidence Limits

The strongest defence is that the disclosed operational record is Dutch online clothing retail with no verified Israeli commercial nexus. Marketing language such as “Designed in Amsterdam” or “Designed in Europe” is not evidence of manufacturing origin, incorporation, or Israeli activity. Nor do broad delivery references prove actual shipping destinations, suppliers, or settlement-related commerce.^{9, 18}

The absence findings are necessarily bounded by limited supply-chain transparency. Public sources do not provide a complete vendor or manufacturing map, and the absence of public evidence cannot prove that all possible indirect exposure is impossible. The evidence nevertheless does not support assigning an Israeli or settlement economic nexus, and unresolved ownership information cannot substitute for evidence of such activity.^{2, 3}

Named Entities and Evidence Map

• Vendify Commerce B.V.: Confirmed operator of multiple Decarba storefronts; Dutch address and registration details disclosed; no public evidence identified of Israeli operations, investment, or settlement commerce.^{1, 2}
• Decarba / DCRB: Clothing and online-retail trademark activity reported in secondary records; no separate Israeli entity or economic activity identified.^{13, 14}
• Pasano Collection: Another storefront operated by Vendify, not verified as a subsidiary or as evidence of Israeli exposure.¹²
• LCOM Holding B.V.: Limited secondary management lead only; no verified ownership, beneficial control, or Israeli economic connection.^{3, 11}

Political: Political

Mechanism of Involvement

No public evidence identified of Decarba or Vendify making a statement on the Israel-Palestine conflict, conducting political lobbying, engaging in anti-BDS advocacy, making relevant political or conflict-related donations, supporting the IDF or military-welfare funds, funding settlement organisations, or directing corporate resources to Israeli state, military, or state-aligned bodies.^{4, 5}

No public evidence identified of operations, retail presence, subsidiaries, dealerships, or settlement-linked activity in Israel, the West Bank, East Jerusalem, the Golan Heights, or Israeli settlements. The reviewed material also found no Decarba mention in specified OHCHR settlement-business updates, the reviewed Special Rapporteur report, or listed civil-society reports; this remains a document-scoped result rather than proof of absence from every source or later publication.^{5, 16}

No public evidence identified of Israel-Palestine-related employee-speech, workplace, shareholder, content-moderation, editorial, or algorithmic-suppression disputes involving Decarba or Vendify. No public evidence identified of state partnerships, military heritage, defence-sector branding, Brand Israel sponsorship, or an Israel-linked founding mission.^{4, 5}

Counter-Arguments and Evidence Limits

The company’s strongest defence is that its available public-facing activity is commercial fashion marketing and distance-selling retail, not political advocacy or state partnership. Its legal notices, product material, and social-facing brand presence are commercial and fashion-focused. No verified statement or conduct supports inferring a political position from silence.^{4, 9}

The audit also declines to treat unrelated consumer-protection allegations concerning China-linked fulfilment, returns, or product-origin representation as Israel-Palestine territorial evidence. A Shenzhen return address confirms a returns arrangement but does not evidence Israeli, settlement, political, or conflict-related operations.^{15, 22}

Because no fully identified controlling natural person was verified, person-specific searches cannot safely attribute political donations, investments, or affiliations to an ambiguous partial name. This limitation cuts against both overclaiming and unwarranted attribution.^{3, 11}

Named Entities and Evidence Map

• Decarba / Vendify Commerce B.V.: No public evidence identified of Israel-Palestine statements, lobbying, donations, anti-BDS activity, or settlement operations.^{4, 5}
• LCOM Holding B.V. / “Hoogendijk, L.”: Reported management information is incomplete and does not permit reliable personal attribution; no verified political nexus identified.^{3, 11}
• OHCHR and civil-society materials: Reviewed, specified materials contained no Decarba entry or mention; the finding is limited to the reviewed documents and searches.^{5, 16}

BDS-1000 Score

Method: V6.5.

• V_MAX: 0.00 Avg_OTHERS: 0.00
• BRS Score: 0 Tier: E (Minimal/No Complicity)

V_MAX is 0.00 because the audits identified no verified military, digital, economic, or political Israel/Palestine nexus attributable to Decarba, Vendify Commerce B.V., or an established controlling entity. The Tier E result reflects the evidence-led, human-vetted V6.5 method: civilian retail activity, unresolved management information, and unverified or unrelated allegations are not scored as complicity.

Methodology Note

• This dossier synthesizes only the four supplied domain audits and does not add unverified claims, inferred ownership, or external allegations.
• The assessment is evidence-led: Impact concerns documented activity type; Magnitude (M) uses domain-specific scale and duration; and Proximity (P) concerns directness of the documented connection.
• A documented legal operator is not automatically a verified parent, shareholder, beneficial owner, or controller; no transitive guilt is assigned through unresolved management or shared-operator relationships.
• Divested, exited, discontinued, or otherwise mitigated operations would be assessed under the temporal rule and not treated as ongoing exposure without evidence. No such verified Israel-related operations were identified here.
• Settlement operations, where evidenced, may engage both Economic and Political; no public evidence identified of such operations in this case.
• “No public evidence identified” records the result of the audits’ targeted and document-scoped checks. It is not a claim of universal factual absence, especially where supplier, ownership, or vendor disclosures are incomplete.