Givenchy MILITARY

Direct Defence Contracting & Procurement

No public evidence identified of any contract, tender award, framework agreement, or memorandum of understanding between Givenchy and the Israeli Ministry of Defence, the Israel Defense Forces, the Israel Prison Service, the Israel Border Police, or any other Israeli state security body; this finding rests on the absence of any such reference across the company and NGO/UN sources checked in this audit, including Givenchy’s own corporate human-rights disclosures and LVMH’s group Human Rights Charter, neither of which mentions Israel, defence, or military matters at all.^{1, 2, 3} Givenchy does not appear on the one Israeli defence-export primary source checked directly, SIBAT’s own description of its brokering and marketing services for Israeli defence and homeland-security equipment, which lists no fashion, apparel, or luxury company among the entities it serves.⁴ No public evidence identified of any corporate press release, government announcement, or trade-press report describing defence cooperation, a joint venture, or a partnership agreement between Givenchy and an Israeli defence entity.⁵ Controlling principals searched by name: Bernard Arnault, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of LVMH (Givenchy’s parent group), was searched for defence-board roles, Israeli-defence-prime equity, FIDF/reservist-fund donations, and public co-belligerency statements; no such acts were found, and the only Israel-linked act identified was a 2021 investment by his family venture vehicle, Aglaé Ventures, in the Israeli cybersecurity company Wiz, which is not an Israeli defence prime.^{6, 7} Pietro Beccari, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of the LVMH Fashion Group (the division that includes Givenchy) and of Louis Vuitton, to whom Givenchy’s chief executive reports, was searched for defence-industry directorships or Israel-related statements; none were found in his LVMH-published governance biography or in trade-press coverage of his appointment.⁸ Amandine Ohayon, Chief Executive Officer of Givenchy since 9 January 2026, was searched for defence-industry or Israel-related ties; none were found in available biographical coverage; her appointment was announced on 7 January 2026 with a stated effective date of 9 January 2026, and that two-day lead is corroborated rather than undermined by two further independent trade-press reports published 7 and 8 January 2026 that both use the identical “effective from/as of the 9th of January” framing, and by a later profile that describes her as already “at the helm of Givenchy” from 9 January 2026.^{9, 10, 11, 12} Mark Shorten was reported by trade press on 17 November 2025 to be leaving Loewe to become Givenchy’s Global Sales Director effective 1 January 2026, a report dated roughly six weeks before that stated start date, and no source retrieved across this audit’s research dated on or after 1 January 2026 uses the title “Global Sales Director” for him at Givenchy; a professional organisation-chart profile checked in this audit still lists him only as Loewe’s President, Greater China, with no Givenchy entry at all, while a 17 September 2026 trade-press article instead identifies him, by direct quotation, as “Chief Commercial Officer of Givenchy,” a title that a further 23 September 2026 report on two other Givenchy executive-committee additions and a 4 October 2026 Givenchy job posting neither corroborate nor contradict since neither mentions Shorten by name; this audit accordingly treats “Chief Commercial Officer” as his most recently confirmed Givenchy title and the November 2025 “Global Sales Director” designation as an unconfirmed, possibly superseded, planned title, and he was searched for defence-industry or Israel-related ties under both titles, with none found.^{13, 14, 15, 16, 17} Anne-Sophie Christiane Kieken, a current director of Givenchy Couture Limited (the Maison’s UK operating entity) per that company’s Companies House officer record, was searched for defence-industry, settlement, or military-related activity; none was found, and the search was complicated by the commonality of her first name.¹⁸ Delphine Arnault, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Christian Dior Couture since 1 February 2023, a member of the LVMH Board of Directors and of the LVMH Executive Committee, and a daughter of Bernard Arnault, was searched for defence-board roles, FIDF-fund or reservist-fund donations, and Rafael or Elbit equity ties; her LVMH-published governance biography names no such role, and no such act was found.¹⁹ Financière Agache (also previously named Groupe Arnault), the Arnault family’s Paris-based holding company that controls 96% of Christian Dior SE, which in turn holds roughly 42% of LVMH, was searched for Israel-related investments; its own description of its structure and of Aglaé Ventures, the venture-investing entity it established in 2017, contains no Israel content, and the Wiz investment is attributed to Aglaé Ventures rather than to Financière Agache directly in the sources reviewed.⁷ LVMH Luxury Ventures, LVMH’s own private-equity investment arm, led a $90 million funding round in June 2022 for Lusix, an Israeli manufacturer of lab-grown diamonds whose production facility is located near Tel Aviv; this is a financial/materials investment, not a defence-sector transaction, and no public evidence identified connects it to Givenchy.²⁰ L Catterton, a private-equity fund in which LVMH is described as a substantial shareholder, invested $34 million for a 35.8% stake in Il Makiage, an Israeli-founded cosmetics brand, in a deal reported on 5 June 2017 - a date more than five years before this audit and accordingly flagged [pre-2020]; no 2025/2026 source located this audit confirms or disconfirms whether L Catterton still holds this stake, so continuation status remains unknown, and no public evidence identified connects this transaction to Givenchy.²¹ The Israeli cybersecurity company Wiz, the subject of Aglaé Ventures’ 2021 investment, was acquired by Google in an all-cash transaction announced in March 2025 and reported complete by March 2026, meaning the original independent Israeli investment target no longer exists in that form as of the research date; no source located this audit states whether Aglaé Ventures’ specific equity position was cashed out, rolled over, or otherwise disposed of, and no public evidence identified connects this transaction to Givenchy.^{22, 23}

Dual-Use Products & Tactical Variants

No public evidence identified that Givenchy manufactures or markets ruggedised, tactical, mil-spec, or defence-grade variants of its products; a targeted search for Givenchy tactical or military-spec products sold to Israeli security forces returned only unrelated Israeli tactical-gear manufacturers (e.g., FAB Defense, Agilite Gear, Lior Tactical, FOBUS) and ordinary Givenchy luxury retail listings, with no overlap between the two.²⁴ No public evidence identified distinguishing civilian versus military-specified Givenchy products, because no dual-use or militarised Givenchy product line was identified in the first instance.⁵ No public evidence identified of any export licence application, end-user certificate, or government export-control review concerning Givenchy sales to an Israeli defence or security end-user.⁵

Heavy Machinery, Construction & Infrastructure

No public evidence identified of Givenchy equipment, vehicles, or machinery - Givenchy is a fashion, leather-goods, and fragrance house with no heavy-machinery or construction product line - being used in construction, maintenance, or demolition activity within Israeli settlements, the separation barrier, military installations, or other occupied territories.⁵ No public evidence identified of direct or indirect (dealer/distributor/secondary-market) supply of equipment by Givenchy reaching such end-users, for the same reason.⁵ No public evidence identified of any Givenchy contract for the construction, maintenance, servicing, or expansion of checkpoints, detention facilities, military bases, the separation barrier, or settlement infrastructure.⁵ No Givenchy retail presence in a West Bank, East Jerusalem, or Golan Heights settlement was identified; a search of Givenchy’s global flagship-store announcements returned stores in the United States, Hong Kong, the United Arab Emirates, and other markets, with no West Bank or settlement location named.²⁵ Who Profits’ February 2022 investigation into the Design City shopping complex, built in the Mishor Adumim industrial zone of the Ma’ale Adumim settlement in the occupied West Bank, names six companies associated with financing, construction, or operation of the complex - Roche Bobois, Altoni Leather S.P.A, Natuzzi S.p.A, Swarovski, Margolin Bros, and Kass Group - and names neither Givenchy, LVMH, nor Dior.²⁶ A sibling LVMH Maison, Dior, was reported in June 2020 to be planning a 143-square-metre flagship boutique in Jerusalem’s Mamilla Mall, described as its intended largest boutique in the Middle East and Europe, a report more than five years old and accordingly flagged [pre-2020]; no evidence identified in this audit confirms whether the store opened or describes its current operational status, and no evidence identified names Givenchy or LVMH in connection with it, so this is recorded here as sibling-brand group-attribution context only and not as a Givenchy finding.²⁷

Supply Chain Integration with Defence Primes

No public evidence identified of Givenchy supplying components, sub-systems, raw materials, or specialist manufacturing services to Elbit Systems, Israel Aerospace Industries, Rafael Advanced Defense Systems, Israel Military Industries/Elbit Land, or any other Israeli defence prime contractor; Givenchy’s own supply-chain disclosure under the California Transparency in Supply Chains Act describes supplier auditing focused on labour and working-condition risk and names no Israeli facility.²⁸ No public evidence identified of any specific component category (optical systems, electronic sub-assemblies, propulsion components, structural or armour materials, guidance systems, communication modules) supplied by Givenchy to an Israeli defence manufacturer, because no such supply relationship was identified in the first instance.²⁸ No public evidence identified of any joint development programme, co-production agreement, technology-transfer arrangement, or licensed-manufacturing agreement between Givenchy and an Israeli defence firm.⁵ The only historical Givenchy-branded licensing arrangement identified in US corporate filings is a January 1994 “Givenchy License Agreement” between Givenchy Corporation and the costume-jewellery maker Victoria Creations, Inc., covering exclusive worldwide marketing rights to the Bijoux Givenchy trade name through 1999; this filing is unrelated to Israel, defence, or military matters and is noted only to document the limits of SEC-filing-based research on Givenchy.²⁹

Logistical Sustainment & Base Services

No public evidence identified of any Givenchy contract to provide catering, transport, fuel supply, waste management, facilities maintenance, telecommunications, or other support services to IDF bases, military training facilities, detention centres, or security installations.⁵ No public evidence identified of any such service with a geographic scope in the West Bank, Golan Heights, East Jerusalem, or the Negev, because no underlying service contract was identified in the first instance.⁵ No public evidence identified of any Givenchy-linked shipping, freight-forwarding, or port-handling contract specifically servicing Israeli defence logistics, military cargo, or arms shipments, as distinct from routine commercial shipping to Israeli civilian ports; Givenchy is a fashion, leather-goods, and fragrance house with globally distributed consumer retail, and no logistics relationship of any kind with Israeli defence end-users was identified.⁵

Munitions, Weapons Systems & Strategic Platforms

No public evidence identified of Givenchy acting as a prime contractor or licensed manufacturer of small arms, artillery systems, armoured vehicles, tactical drones, naval vessels, or other lethal platforms supplied to Israeli forces.⁵ No public evidence identified of Givenchy supplying ammunition, explosive ordnance, chemical propellants, warhead components, or munitions precursor materials to any Israeli defence end-user.⁵ No public evidence identified of any Givenchy role in the manufacture, integration, maintenance, or supply of components for Iron Dome, David’s Sling, Arrow, or any other strategic Israeli defence platform, fighter aircraft, main battle tank, warship, or ballistic-missile system.⁵ No public evidence identified of Givenchy supplying guidance electronics, fire-control systems, radar components, propulsion units, or warhead casings to any Israeli lethal or strategic system.⁵ The June 2024 civil-society/trade-union report “Companies Arming Israel and Their Financiers,” as reproduced on a co-publishing coalition member’s site, names six arms-producer companies (Boeing, General Dynamics, Leonardo, Lockheed Martin, RTX, Rolls-Royce) and a list of financier institutions (BNP Paribas, Crédit Agricole, Deutsche Bank, Barclays, UBS, Norway’s government pension fund, Allianz), and names neither Givenchy, LVMH, nor Dior among either list.³⁰

Export Licensing, Regulatory & Legal History

No public evidence identified of any government decision in any jurisdiction to grant, deny, suspend, or revoke an export licence for Givenchy products destined for an Israeli military or security end-user.⁵ No public evidence identified of any investigation, citation, or enforcement action concerning Givenchy’s compliance with arms embargoes, export-control regimes, or sanctions affecting defence trade with Israel.⁵ No public evidence identified of any court proceeding, judicial review, or legal challenge brought against Givenchy, or against a government, concerning a Givenchy defence-supply relationship with Israel.⁵ Givenchy and its parent LVMH are not US Securities and Exchange Commission registrants - LVMH is listed on Euronext Paris - so no 10-K or 20-F exists for the group; the only SEC-indexed Givenchy reference found across EDGAR is the unrelated 1994/1995 costume-jewellery licensing filing described above.²⁹

Civil Society Scrutiny & Documented Investigations

Who Profits’ company database, which tracks businesses involved in the Israeli occupation across categories including Settlement Enterprise, Population Control, and Military/Security/Surveillance, was checked directly and did not list Givenchy or LVMH among the entries reviewed, though not all alphabetical pages of the database were paginated through.³¹ A civil-society summary of Human Rights Council Special Rapporteur Francesca Albanese’s July 2025 report “From Economy of Occupation to Economy of Genocide” (A/HRC/59/23) describes the report as naming categories including arms manufacturers, surveillance/military-technology firms, financial institutions, construction firms, academic institutions, and tourism platforms/charities, without naming Givenchy, LVMH, or any fashion/luxury company.³² The UN OHCHR database of business enterprises involved in settlement-related activity (HRC res. 31/36 / 53/25) has grown from 112 listed enterprises in its 2020 edition to 158 in its most recent (2025) iteration per secondary reporting, with named entries including Airbnb, Booking.com, Motorola Solutions, and TripAdvisor; no secondary source located in this audit names Givenchy, LVMH, or Dior, and the underlying UN document itself could not be read directly, as the hosted PDF copies returned as unreadable binary content to this audit’s tooling.³³ The only retrievable Al-Haq report addressing business and human rights in occupied territory is “Business and Human Rights in Occupied Territory: Guidance for Upholding Human Rights,” co-published with the Global Legal Action Network and dated 30 April 2020 - more than five years before this audit and accordingly flagged [pre-2020] - which a direct review of its publication notice shows names no fashion or luxury company.³⁴ The Business & Human Rights Resource Centre’s company profile for “Givenchy SA” lists allegations limited to migrant-labour-abuse tracking and a UK Modern Slavery Act statement assessment, with no Israel, settlement, defence, or military content.¹ The Business & Human Rights Resource Centre’s profile for “LVMH Group” similarly contains no Israel, settlement, defence, or military content; its listed allegations concern Italian labour-abuse investigations into Tod’s and EU deforestation-law lobbying by an LVMH-owned leather maker, and it records LVMH’s response rate to the Centre’s requests as 0%.² Civil-society and boycott-adjacent commentary names Givenchy only in a general, undated “Fashion Divest from Israel!” petition that lists Givenchy alphabetically among dozens of fashion houses with a contact e-mail address, without alleging any specific Givenchy conduct, policy, or fact.³⁵ A December 2023 commentary piece names Givenchy, alongside Chanel, Louis Vuitton, Tommy Hilfiger, Ralph Lauren, and Michael Kors, as fashion houses that have “either voiced their support for or have financial ties with Israel,” attributing that characterization solely to a third-party brand-checking website and providing no specific statement, payment, or partnership for Givenchy; this claim could not be independently verified against any primary source and is recorded here as unverified rather than as a finding.³⁶ A separate boycott-monitoring aggregator, the Boycott Directory, maintains a Givenchy-specific page naming LVMH Group as parent under a “Military & Political Complicity” heading, alleging that Bernard Arnault’s 2021 investment via Aglaé Ventures in the cybersecurity firm Wiz and LVMH Luxury Ventures’ 2022 investment in the lab-grown-diamond maker Lusix “connect the group’s leadership to Israel’s economy during an ongoing military occupation”; following the aggregator’s own source chain, its only cited reference for either claim is a news report of the already-independently-verified Wiz investment, it cites no source at all for the Lusix claim or for the “military occupation” framing, and an identically-worded entry for the sibling brand Louis Vuitton confirms this is a templated group-level characterization resting on the same two civilian-sector venture-capital investments already documented in this audit rather than on any defence-sector conduct, so the “military complicity” label itself is not independently substantiated by any primary source found in this audit.^{37, 38} A separately-checked boycott-brand list (uscpr.org) that names consumer-facing “BDS brands” does not include Givenchy, LVMH, or Dior among its entries.³⁹ A September 2026 controversy over a magazine photoshoot of Special Rapporteur Francesca Albanese wearing luxury brands identified the brands at issue as Loro Piana and Celine - not Givenchy - with the “Israel-linked” characterization resting on LVMH-group financial investments (the 2021 Wiz investment and the 2022 Lusix investment described above) rather than on any conduct by the brands themselves; the same reporting states that the official BDS movement list does not include LVMH among its principal named targets, distinguishing it from secondary brand-monitoring platforms (Boycat, Gaza.nu, the Boycott Directory) that do flag the Wiz and Lusix investments.^{40, 41} Separately, a sibling LVMH Maison, Sephora, was the subject of an August 2026 Israel-market controversy after an Israeli retailer, Glam42, announced what Sephora subsequently described as a temporary resale agreement for Sephora Collection products rather than a store-opening franchise, with no evidence identified that Givenchy was named or implicated in this episode.⁴² No public evidence identified, from any source fetchable without login, corroborating a report of an organised BDS Belfast protest at a Sephora store in February 2026 citing LVMH’s and Bernard Arnault’s alleged ties to the Israeli government.⁴² No public evidence identified of any institutional divestment decision (pension fund, sovereign wealth fund, or university endowment) specifically targeting Givenchy on defence-sector grounds.³⁵ LVMH published its first group-wide Human Rights Charter for commercial partners on 29 May 2026, covering suppliers, service providers, image partners, distributors, artisans, lessors, and other third parties across every LVMH brand, including a provision on the management of sensitive regions and sourcing from vulnerable or conflict-affected territories overseen by a supervisory committee that includes Antoine Arnault and led by Julie Vallat, former Vice President for Human Rights at L’Oréal; a specific internal section number and the committee’s full membership, reported in some secondary characterizations as numbered “1.12” and as a named “Vigilance Committee,” could not be confirmed against a successfully-opened copy of the charter in this audit and is accordingly not asserted as established fact, and no page describing the charter that this audit could open names Israel, defence, military, or security forces in any capacity.^{3, 43, 44, 45, 46} No public evidence identified of any Givenchy-specific public statement, policy change, contract termination, or end-use-monitoring commitment issued in response to civil-society pressure on defence-supply-chain grounds, as distinct from Givenchy’s and LVMH’s generic labour-rights, human-rights-charter, and California Supply Chains Act disclosures described above.^{1, 2, 3}