The decision came after the French consumer watchdog (DGCCRF) discovered disturbing ads on the Shein marketplace: sex dolls with “child-like” features and even prohibited weapons, such as machetes and large knives.
In response, Shein announced a global ban on the sale of sex dolls on the platform, temporarily suspended the “adult products” category in France, and took action against the responsible sellers.
The investigation is ongoing, and French authorities have also involved the European Commission. Until proven otherwise, access to the site has not yet been completely blocked, but the suspension procedure is active. Shein took immediate measures to limit the reputational damage.

The paradox is clear: on the one hand, France appears to be targeting the ultra-fast fashion model with aggressive policies—such as a proposed law to impose a penalty on low-cost imports, fines for unfair business practices (e.g., Shein was fined €40 million for misleading discounts), and strong political action against Shein.

On the other hand, France is granting Shein prestigious physical access, thanks to a partnership with Société des Grands Magasins (SGM), which operates BHV and other stores in France, allowing for an “offline test” of the brand.

This means “banning online” but “accepting a physical store” at the same time—a contradiction that reflects real tensions between political values, economic interests, and market dynamics.

Why did France give the green light to the physical store?

Here are some hypotheses that help explain why:

Local business strategy: Shein states that France is “a major global fashion market” and that the physical opening serves to “respond to the demand for real-world contact” (Retail Gazette). In other words, from a traditional retail perspective (department stores, foot traffic), the deal makes commercial sense for SGM.

Differentiation between online and offline: The regulations France is implementing often primarily concern e-commerce, imports, low-cost shipping, and deceptive discounting practices. Opening a local physical store may seem like a more “controllable” environment.

Regulatory framework still evolving: Fines, anti-fast fashion rules, and import controls are coming but are not yet fully implemented or may have time limits. France appears to be “making the rules,” but in the meantime, the market continues to shift.

Economic and negotiating pressures: French department stores likely saw the agreement as an opportunity to boost sales (increased footfall, new products). Although politically criticized, there is significant private interest.

Possibility of control and oversight: The fact that the physical store was physically “visible” in Paris, within a regulated space, may have induced the authorities to accept the opening while simultaneously maintaining pressure on online sales.

Timing and lobbying: The fact that the opening caused a stir may also indicate that deals were made before the anti-fast-fashion law was in effect, or that the negotiation took place in a context where the brand was able to enter “before everything was clear.”

Social Reactions and Comments

The store’s opening was accompanied by protests: demonstrators holding signs (“From Colonization to Your Closets”) gathered outside the BHV.
But not everyone was opposed: one customer explained that the appeal for many is simply the price:

“With €200 a month, I can buy 50 T-shirts from Shein, or three made in France..”

(source The Guardian)

This comment underscores how ultra-cheap fast fashion responds to real economic demand, even among those on limited incomes. France’s action has not been confined to the national level: the government has written to the EU, requesting action under the Digital Services Act (DSA) (source: euronews).
The European Commission is involved, and the case could set a precedent for how member states can regulate digital platforms selling potentially illegal or morally controversial items.
Furthermore, according to the Brussels Times, French authorities have threatened permanent bans if certain products return to Shein’s platforms.

In Paris, Deputy Mayor Nicolas Bonnet Oulaldj openly criticized the agreement between Shein and SGM, declaring that allowing an ultra-fast fashion giant to enter the traditional retail landscape is “incompatible” with the city’s environmental and social goals. “Shein cannot be blamed for all the problems affecting French ready-to-wear,” reacted a spokesperson for the Shein platform in France. The Chinese giant plans to open five more discount clothing and accessories stores in the Galeries Lafayette department stores in Dijon, Reims, Grenoble, Angers, and Limoges. “This decision,” stated Anne Hidalgo, Mayor of Paris, “is contrary to the environmental and social ambitions of Paris, which supports responsible and sustainable local retail.” (source: Ansa.it)

BHV owner Frédéric Merlin responded firmly to the criticism, calling the partnership with Shein “the beginning of a new adventure” that combines e-commerce and traditional retail (source: The Guardian). According to him, the products sold in the store are manufactured by Shein itself (“made by Shein in Shein factories”) and are not solely third-party suppliers—a detail that could influence liability assessments.

Things We Don’t Know

There doesn’t appear to be an official French statement stating, “We allowed the physical opening because…” The explanations are drawn primarily from Shein’s statements.
It’s unclear whether the business license for the physical store comes with special conditions or whether there are specific monitoring agreements with local authorities.
It’s not yet clear how future legislation or French government action will impact that physical store (for example, inspections, restrictions, sanctions).
It’s unclear to what extent the physical opening is seen as a “loophole” with respect to online regulations (one possibility); there are no sources that explicitly state this.

Why aren’t Primark and Uniqlo receiving the same pressure as Shein?

Not all major “low-cost” clothing brands are receiving the same public and political pressure that Shein is currently experiencing, as the comparison with Primark and Uniqlo demonstrates. Both brands are present and expanding in France: Primark has announced a €200 million investment in France and Spain to expand its retail network by 2026 and has some of the most profitable stores in the French market; Uniqlo, for its part, continues to strengthen its presence with flagship stores, such as the renovated one in the Paris Opera district, and a large and stable network.

The reason these brands aren’t experiencing the same pressure as Shein?

• Different business models: Primark and Uniqlo operate primarily through established physical stores; they don’t rely on ultra-low-cost imports shipped individually from non-EU countries, as Shein does. This makes them less vulnerable to certain anti-import regulations or micro-parcel taxes.
• Clearer regulation: Many of the measures proposed by France (and other countries)—such as the tax on low-cost parcels—are aimed primarily at cross-border e-commerce, not at brick-and-mortar retailers with established chains.
• Visible and local presence: Having physical stores implies local responsibility, European-wide inventory management, and more direct control, elements that can make their presence more acceptable (politically and socially) compared to an ultra-fast, digital-only player.
• Sustainability and image strategy: Uniqlo, in particular, focuses heavily on “LifeWear” and an image of quality, functionality, and durability, which can mitigate criticism of “disposable” fashion. Primark, despite being “fast fashion,” has a very different model from Shein, with different margins and operating methods. So does greenwashing make a difference?

Primark e Uniqlo non sono però completamente fuori dal radar: l’UE ha richiamato tutti i grandi retailer, compresi questi due marchi, a maggiore trasparenza sulla tracciabilità e sulle performance ambientali attraverso il nuovo quadro normativo del Green Deal, dal Digital Product Passport al divieto di greenwashing e claim ambientali vaghi. La differenza è che, pur essendo criticati per il modello fast fashion, Primark e Uniqlo rientrano in una struttura regolatoria già conosciuta e gestita dall’Europa, mentre Shein rappresenta una sfida nuova: un “gigante digitale” che accelera più velocemente delle norme che cercano di incasellarlo.

Primark and Uniqlo aren’t completely off the radar, however: the EU has called on all major retailers, including these two brands, to increase transparency on traceability and environmental performance through the new Green Deal regulatory framework, from the Digital Product Passport to the ban on greenwashing and vague environmental claims. The difference is that, despite being criticized for their fast fashion model, Primark and Uniqlo fall within a regulatory framework already known and managed by Europe, while Shein represents a new challenge: a “digital giant” that is accelerating faster than the regulations that seek to pigeonhole it.

Reflections

The Shein case is emblematic of the fact that the transition to more sustainable fashion is not linear and full of contradictions. On the one hand, France seems to declare “enough with low-cost fast fashion,” while on the other, it accepts—without apparent resistance—the physical arrival of one of the protagonists of the model it seeks to limit.

What lessons can we learn?
Legislation may lag behind the market. Anti-fast fashion regulations, import taxes, and restrictions on misleading discounts are still being implemented. Meanwhile, fast fashion brands are expanding.
The “online” vs. “offline” model creates arbitrage: a physical store may appear more respectable or at least more visible, and therefore perhaps “less risky” in the eyes of authorities, than an e-commerce site shipping low-cost packages from abroad.
Public policies can clash with local economic interests (department stores, employment, customer traffic). This can lead to compromises or seemingly contradictory choices.
Finally, it’s a reminder: consistency between political statements and concrete actions is difficult. The effort towards sustainable fashion requires not only regulations, but also control tools, transparency, and perhaps alternative sales models that aren’t just “faster, cheaper.”

Shein

Shein, the popular ultra-fast fashion brand based in China and Singapore, is known for offering a wide selection of fashionable clothing, accessories and beauty products at very affordable prices. It primarily targets a young audience, with an emphasis on the latest fashion trends and a significant presence on social media for the promotion of its products. In his message to investors, Donald Tang, the executive vice president of Shein, said that the company reported its highest net profit in its history in the first half of 2023, a significant achievement compared to the near breakeven in the same period of 2022 He also highlighted that the company’s continued momentum in the United States is solidifying its leadership position in the market. The Chinese e-commerce giant is known for its rock-bottom prices and campaigns targeting Generation Z on social media platforms, including the hugely popular TikTok. We talked about Shein here:Dangerous chemicals, Inside factories, False statements.

Temu

Temu is a new Chinese platform that recently entered America, launched in September last year by parent company Pdd Holdings, linked to Chinese e-commerce Pinduoduo. Behind there is the Chinese founder and businessman Colin Huang, 43 years old, who according to Forbes has a fortune of over 32 billion dollars. Today he is the 39th richest person in the world according to Forbes’ Real Time Billionaires. Temu offers a wide range of products, from clothing to household items, from surveillance tools to household utensils, and the prices initially seem cheaper even than those of Shein. “Shop like a billionaire,” says the new platform. Temu is known for undercutting competitors like Shein and Wish and also offers free shipping and returns, creating the illusion of lower costs overall. Consumers appear to have spent about 20% more Temu products than Shein in May this year. Unlike Shein, Temu sells a wide range of products, not just fashion, and is appreciated by fans for the slightly higher quality of its products compared to rivals. The key to their low-cost model is the direct connection between consumers and suppliers, with Temu mainly taking care of the shipping process. However, there has been criticism regarding the pressure placed on small producers to lower prices at levels that make it difficult to achieve sustainable profits.This practice has raised concerns about possible ethical implications, such as pay cuts and extended working hours for workers. Additionally, Temu has received criticism for lacking formal brand affiliations, often selling knock-off products that raise issues of copyright infringement and quality control. The Better Business Bureau (BBB) gave Temu a C-minus rating amid complaints from customers, who often complain that the cheap prices hide delivery or quality issues. Reviews on TikTok vary greatly, with some extremely negative and others full of praise, some of which appear to be influenced by discount codes or affiliate links, raising questions about the degree of objectivity of the reviews.

The fight

Shein and Temu focus on ultra-fast fashion, producing thousands of new items a day, and can offer lower prices thanks to the lack of expensive physical stores like those of Zara and H&M. Shein is the market leader, but there are signs that its smaller rival is catching up or even racing ahead: in May, total U.S. spending on Temu eclipsed that of Shein by 20%, according to Second Measure. Both companies are locked in an antitrust battle in a growing industry, expected to reach $185 billion in global sales by 2027.

Temu’s lawsuit claims that Shein dominates more than 75% of the U.S. ultrafast fashion market, exercising a monopoly. Shein will likely try to demonstrate that the ultra-fast fashion market is not distinct and that the company competes in the traditional fast fashion market. A Shein spokesperson responded that Temu’s lawsuit is “baseless and we will defend ourselves vigorously.” Temu also accuses Shein of forcing major manufacturers to accept exclusive deals and threatening to impose fines if they don’t comply.

In recent months, the two have increasingly clashed with each other. Shein obtained a temporary restraining order, in a separate case accusing Temu of using its copyrighted images in product listings, to stop sales of products offered for sale on Temu. Additionally, Shein sued Temu alleging that Temu had enlisted online influencers “to make false and deceptive statements” about Shein to promote its products or statements such as: “Shein is not the only affordable option for clothing ! Check out Temu.com, cheaper and much better quality.”

“For a long time we have exercised considerable restraint and refrained from pursuing legal action,” Temu told CNN in a statement about the new lawsuit against Shein. “However, Shein’s escalating attacks leave us with no choice but to to take legal measures to defend our rights and the rights of merchants who do business with Temu, as well as the right of consumers to have a wide variety of products at affordable prices.”

The battle could last years and require significant resources on both sides. However, it is also possible that the two companies will reach an out-of-court settlement.

The question of whether the ultra-fast fashion market exists or not seems to be fundamental, a group of companies that only market a huge number of low-priced products.

Temu and Shein in comparison

Temu:

• Customers can purchase a variety of products at rock-bottom prices that not only fall into the category of fashion but also household utensils, electronics, etc.
• It includes various styles in the catalog, such as casual wear, formal wear, sportswear, outerwear and seasonal collections. There is also a section dedicated to plus sizes.
• It focuses on affordable prices and tries to offer a sense of luxury and indulgence through its Shop like a Billionaire marketing campaign.
• It does not produce its own items but operates as a marketplace.
• It has not been fully scrutinized for its ethical practices. It emphasizes the promotion of sustainable and ethical brands, focusing on quality and responsible consumption. It claims to offer unique, eco-friendly products while supporting small businesses and artisans.
• It offers more affordable prices than Shein, with seasonal discounts lowering prices even further, and some customers find the quality of their products to be slightly better, but it can vary between sellers.
• Target Audience: Focuses primarily on the average consumer in the United States. It has around 17 million active users, although it is a newer platform.
• It presents itself as a large online retailer and offers a discovery platform based on users’ individual preferences.
• It uses marketing tactics such as discounts, offers and user incentives, with a marketing budget of $1 billion for 2023. Use hauls on TikTok and collaborate with influential figures. Cross-dressing and unboxing aim to influence consumers and create a strong connection with the brand.
• Customer Satisfaction: Has an average rating of 3.4 stars from 820 reviews.
• It provides free returns within 90 days and the possibility of changing products.
• It has customer service described as mediocre, but often offers vouchers as compensation for any inconvenience.

Shein:

• It is a fast fashion brand that mainly targets young women, offering fashionable and trendy clothing at low and accessible prices.
• It offers a wide variety of clothing, including dresses, tops, bottoms, activewear, swimsuits and more. The catalog also includes a wide range of accessories such as jewellery, sunglasses and bags to complete different outfits.
• It is headquartered in China and Singapore, with R&D and logistics centers in several locations.
• It is not considered an ethical or sustainable brand. It claims to produce small quantities of each design, but puts thousands of styles on the market every day. Applying an ultra-fast fashion business model, it prioritizes speed and convenience, aiming to meet the ever-changing demands of fashionable consumers.
• It offers cheap prices but with questions about the durability and quality of the products.
• Target Audience: Target Gen Z and Millennials worldwide. It has around 43 million active users.
• It offers a curated user experience with an algorithm-based recommendation system.
• Primarily use micro-influencer marketing with a few hundred to a few thousand followers on platforms like Instagram, YouTube, and TikTok. It has a large social media presence, with influencers often showing off their purchases made from the brand. Shein offers them free products on a monthly basis. Some of these influencers receive commissions of 10 to 20% of sales.
• It tends to be less convenient than Temu.
• It has an average rating of 2.6 stars from 4,380 reviews, indicating lower satisfaction among customers.
• It provides free returns within 45 days.
• It has automated customer service that may not always effectively resolve specific customer issues.

Ultra-fast fashion

Ultra-fast fashion is an identifiable business model compared to fast fashion. The global ultra-fast fashion market was valued at $17 billion in 2020 and is expected to continue growing. According to MarketResearch.Biz, ultra-fast fashion differs from fast fashion in supply chain strategies, avoids excess inventory, focuses on internal sourcing, on-demand production and shorter delivery times, from a few days to a week, with a combination of agile and responsive procurement strategies. Times become even faster, weeks become days. New styles are increasing, up to thousands per day.

Ultra-fast fashion companies adopt a pull model instead of the conventional push model: from the data continuously collected on customers, products are made within a couple of weeks, unlike the traditional model in which products are offered on the market by pushing retailers to sale, with an accumulation of warehouse stocks. Ultra-fast fashion brands  incite consumers to buy quickly with digital marketing tactics like fast fashion companies but with much more and more precise data. Furthermore, ultra-fast fashion companies follow a “trial and repeat” logic. They produce a small batch of products according to the current trend. If the response from the market is good, they move to mass production, otherwise they do not continue production. Furthermore, they have an even faster supply chain, prefer a national production base to shorten delivery times, offer a wider range of sizes and with the lowest possible prices.

In the supply chain of ultra-fast fashion companies, the influencer culture is deeply rooted. These companies rely on TikTok, Instagram and YouTube, where they offer shopping as entertainment. While fast fashion has often taken inspiration from high fashion catwalks, making the latest runway trends accessible, ultra-fast fashion brands follow popular figures more on social media.

Which companies can be considered ultra-fast fashion?

• Shein
• Boohoo Group plc
• Missguided
• ASOS
• Fashion Nova
• PrettyLittleThing
• Cider

Ultrafast companies have been criticized for unethical practices, including piracy, mass pollution, and a disposable production and consumption model. Most clothes are made from unsustainable materials, such as polyester, and of questionable quality, quickly ending up in landfills. Since the offering is based on micro-trends, people are encouraged to wear these items a few times before throwing them away. Furthermore, there are accusations of human exploitation and practices that do not respect workers’ rights. Despite this, we continue to buy from these companies and drive them to record revenues.

Sources: BBC; YourSustainableGuide); CNN; Forbes; Euronews; Market.biz.

The findings show SHEIN’s careless attitude towards the environmental and human health risks associated with the use of hazardous chemicals.

Strict concentration limits are set for products sold in Europe in accordance with the regulation on dangerous chemicals, known as REACH, present as additives or contaminants in fabrics for clothing, accessories and shoes. The EU regulation places the responsibility for providing information on the hazards of the chemicals used on producers of chemicals and manufacturers of products containing the substances. All companies (both manufacturers and brands) must therefore be fully aware of the chemical substances used by their suppliers and take responsibility for eliminating their use, their presence in products, their impacts and any discharges, including those into water.
The REACH Regulation is based on the principle that it is the responsibility for manufacturers, importers and downstream users to ensure that they manufacture, place on the market or use only such substances that do not adversely affect human health or the environment.

It has emerged that SHEIN is breaking hard-won EU environmental regulations on chemicals and risking the health of consumers and the workers at the suppliers that make the products.

Of the 47 products purchased, 7 contained dangerous chemical substances in excess of the limits set by EU regulations, i.e. 15% of the items analysed.

Very high levels of phthalates were found in 5 boots or shoes (FT-17, FT-27, FT-15, FT-35, FT-42) at above 100,000 mg/kg (100%), compared to the requirement in the EU’s REACH regulation of <1,000 mg/kg. The highest level of phthalates was found in some black snow boots (FT-27) bought in Switzerland, at 685,000 mg/kg of DEHP (680%).

The release of nickel above the EU REACH requirements of <0.5 μg/m2/week was found in a pair of red stiletto boots (FT-22) bought in Spain, at 1.5 μg/m2/ week. Also in a suedette moto jacket bought in Spain a quantity of 0.7 μg/m2/week of nickel was found, apparently breaching the REACH requirements for the release of nickel (<0.5 μg/ m2/week). However, there is a margin of uncertainty in the testing.

A total of 15 of the products contain hazardous chemicals at levels of concern (32%).

At least one hazardous chemical was quanti- fied in 45 of the 47 products, although most were at relatively lower levels.

The concern is not only that SHEIN products with illegal levels of hazardous chemicals are being widely sold in Europe, contravening EU regulations, with potential impacts on consumers. It also suggests that SHEIN has little oversight of hazardous chemical management within its supply chain.

“It’s the workers in SHEIN’s suppliers, the people in surrounding communities and the environment in China that bear the brunt of SHEIN’s hazardous chemical addiction”, explained Viola Wohlgemuth, Toxics and Circular economy Campaigner with Greenpeace Germany. “At its core, the linear business model of fast fashion is totally incompatible with a climate-friendly future – but the emergence of ultra fast fashion is further accelerating the climate and environmental catastrophe and must be stopped in its tracks through binding legislation. Alternatives to buying new must become the new norm.”

We also talked about Shein in these articles:

L’indagine Channel 4 dentro le fabbriche di Shein;

Le false dichiarazioni di Shein sulle fabbriche;

Patagonia vs Fast Fashion: leader a confronto.

Source: Greenpeace Germania

• they work 7 days a week
• up to 18 hours a day
• they don’t have a break, the employees are forced to wash their hair during their lunch break
• they only have one day off per month
• they make 500 items of clothing a day
• they are paid a maximum of 4,000 yuan per month (about 550 euros)
• for every mistake made, they lose 2/3 of their daily salary
• they receive 4 euro cents per item

violating both Chinese labor laws and Shein’s Supplier Code of Conduct.

Starting at 8 in the morning and ending at 2 the next morning, not having rest, not receiving an adequate salary: this is what, according to the survey, employees endure in order to work.

A Shein spokesperson said to City AM: “We are extremely concerned about the claims made by Channel 4 that they would violate the code of conduct agreed upon by every Shein supplier. Any non-compliance with this code is dealt with quickly and we will end partnerships that do not. meet our standards. We have requested specific information from Channel 4 so that we can investigate.”

It’s not – unfortunately – the first time

In November last year, another report revealed non-compliant working conditions in 17 factories supplying Shein. In interviews conducted by Public Eye researchers, employees reported working three shifts a day, often having only one day off per month, not having an employment contract, and being encouraged to work long hours motivated by the “payment per item” approach. By receiving a sum of money for each completed piece, they are also not guaranteed to be paid in case of quality problems.

From Public Eye’s report:

“We follow our researcher once again, a few kilometres to the West where numerous additional textile factories are located. These factories are generally slightly larger and have up to 300 employees. They usually have reasonably well-functioning ventilation systems and slightly larger workspaces, and there are employee canteens and accommodation in the vicinity. The five employees of larger companies with whom the researcher speaks describe similar working conditions to those already noted: 11 hours a day, no employment contract, and no social security contributions.

In one of the companies, we encounter something that we have not seen elsewhere – a guaranteed minimum income. A recruitment poster at the factory entrance states the minimum incomes for specific tasks: cutting threads: 4,000 yuan; packaging: 5,000 yuan; ironing: 7,000 yuan. The pay difference for ironing is explained by the fact that the workers iron the clothes in constant heat, due to the steam, and can seldom sit down”.

In August 2021 we told about Shein’s false statements about the factories.

Meanwhile, Shein continues to launch “sustainable” initiatives

The company, which releases between 700 and 1,000 new items a day, announced a few days ago the launch of a platform for exchanging and reselling products, currently only available in the US market. “At Shein, we believe it is our responsibility building a fair fashion future for all, while accelerating solutions to reduce textile waste, ”said Adam Whinston, head of the company’s CSR division (Forbes, October 2022).

The reaction of an influencer agency

Meanwhile, Georgia Portugal, who recruits UK influencers to promote brands on social media, told her followers that she has decided she and her agency will no longer work with Shein: “We will no longer be working with Shein, no longer getting our clients any collaborations with Shein, until their working conditions change”. Portogallo made its decision after learning how workers are paid in Chinese factories that produce clothes for Shein. The influencer appears in Channel 4’s investigative video to explain how young people are drawn to Shein’s social media promotions with the lure of free clothes. “After watching this documentary, I now know – 100 per cent it’s confirmed to me – that their staff are underpaid, they work too many long hours, they don’t get days off. The whole working conditions are horrendous.” (iNews, October 2022). “Shein Hauls” are viewed millions of times on YouTube and TikTok. Young people open the delivered packages, try on clothes and comment in front of the camera.

The severance of relationships with Shein by influencer marketing agencies is a good way to increase the pressure on the ultra-fast fashion brand, which is aimed primarily at younger people.

Cover photo: Channel 4