Reporting on Living Wages: Was 2025 a Good Year?

7 July 2026

Let’s start with the global picture… are companies disclosing their Living Wage data in their annual reports published in 2026?

Corporate reporting on living wages has been a voluntary measure until the implementation of new European regulation (such as CSRD, CSDDD).

While we know that many companies take internal steps to pay a living wage to their direct or indirect employees, not that many disclose what they do with enough clarity in their annual reports. To give you an idea of the scale of the problem, the World Benchmarking Alliance estimated that only 5% out of the 2000 most influential companies in the world, publicly report they guarantee a living wage for their direct employees, and only 3% report taking action to support living wages in their supply chains.

Although the amount of companies implementing a living wage is still low, WageIndicator has observed more companies improving how they are disclosing, or showing credible paths to implement living wages. There's been an improvement from companies communicating how they calculate their wage estimates, for example, a few corporations disclose they use WageIndicator databases in their reports.

How do you define best practices in living wage reporting?

When looking at progress, many companies could do better with simple steps, for example:

1. Publishing their living wage aspirations with clearly defined targets
2. Using the right definitions aligned to international standards, regulation or the ILO
3. Avoid fragmented implementation
4. Be more transparent in the way living wage policy is disclosed, for example:

• Mention the month and year of the wage data you are reporting
• Mention the source of your Living Wage estimates
• Publish clear Living Wage gaps per country
• Specify who is - and who is not - earning a Living Wage
• Define your ambitions with a deadline
• Specify if implementing Living Wages in your direct workforce, or also in the supply chain?

Valeria, you have been analysing quite some reports over the last couple of months. What is your impression?

For this research, I analysed publicly available annual reports from globally operating companies published in 2026. The sample is mainly European — the majority of companies are headquartered in Europe. Remaining companies are from North America, Australia, Africa and the Middle East. In terms of sectors, the sample is diverse — including technology, retail, healthcare, chemicals, financial services and logistics etc.

To understand how companies approach Living Wage reporting, we focused on some key aspects. First, the terminology companies use. Second, the scope of reporting and whether companies set targets in this area. Third, commitment to Living Wage. And finally, the overall quality of living wage disclosure — how detailed and meaningful the reporting actually is.

The first question we addressed in this research was: What terminology do companies use in their reports? Specifically, the terms: living wage, adequate wage and fair wage. So, looking closely at the results, about 25% of companies use only the term "Living Wage" and a similar proportion use only “Adequate Wage”, A few use the term "Fair Wage" and about a fifth make no mention of any of these terms at all.

What is interesting is that the majority of companies use more than one term in the same report— most commonly combining 'Living Wage' and 'Adequate Wage'.

Is there any reason for that?

Yes, this is a relevant point because according to the ESRS standard, Living Wage data are disclosed under the section 'Adequate Wages'. So companies that follow CSRD requirements tend to use 'Adequate Wage' as the formal reporting heading — while still referring to 'Living Wage' in the narrative parts of their reports.

And what about the second aspect you looked at, on the scope of the Living Wage reporting?

What we can see is that the vast majority report on Living Wage only for their own workforce.

Just a small number of companies extend their commitment to their direct suppliers. And even less go further to the full supply chain.

What this tells us is that Living Wage reporting is still largely an internal story. Companies mainly focus on their own employees, but most of the workers in supply chains are not directly employed by these companies. So the workers who are most at risk of not earning a Living Wage are simply not being reported on.

However, if we look at targets in this area, there are some encouraging signs. A growing number of companies have set concrete goals to extend their Living Wage reporting into the supply chain.

In terms of which sectors are leading on supply chain coverage — it is notably Retail and Fashion and Consumer Goods.

The next important aspect to explore was how companies reflect their commitment to Living Wage in their reports. Do they have an explicit Living Wage policy?

The results show that nearly 50% of the companies analysed integrate Living Wage into a broader Human Rights policy. About a quarter of companies base their commitment on external frameworks, most commonly the UN Principles or the ILO Core Conventions.

Only a few companies have a dedicated, standalone Living Wage policy. Meanwhile, over a third of companies have no specified commitment at all. Looking at their reports, almost all of them demonstrate the lowest levels of Living Wage disclosure.

One observation: companies with a clear commitment, whether through a dedicated Living Wage policy or a broader framework, provide higher-quality reporting. Companies structured their Living Wage work as a result they can produce better and more detailed reporting.

Let’s discuss the next important step: can you tell us what you found when combining all the findings?

Yes, after combining all the findings we developed an overall assessment of Living Wage disclosure in annual reports.

A significant share of companies (around 4 out of 10) provide a high level of Living Wage disclosure. These companies present a full picture: a clear commitment supported by numerical data, a named benchmark, a defined scope, and a transparent methodology.

A smaller group of companies (around 2 out of 10) reach a medium level of disclosure. They disclose meaningful Living Wage information, but the picture is not complete—for example, a company may report a commitment and some numerical data but still lack details on scope, benchmarks, or methodology.

A similar share of companies (around 2 out of 10) are at the low level of disclosure. Living Wage is mentioned, but without any supporting data or context.

Still, a sizable share of companies (around 3 out of 10) provide no disclosure at all. Living Wage is not mentioned in their reporting.

Are there any interesting insights from a geographical perspective?

Almost all of the companies that reach the high level of Living Wage disclosure are European. Hardly any non-EU companies reach the high level of living wage disclosure. These companies are mostly split between the low and “any disclosure” levels. This suggests regional context and regulation play a major role in how seriously companies address this topic in their annual disclosures.

Another observation relates to targets: Companies that set concrete Living Wage targets are much more likely to report at a high level. Nearly four out of five companies that define specific Living Wage targets fall into the High disclosure category. This is a very consistent pattern: Living Wage targets appear to be more than just aspirations — they seem to be an important indicator of disclosure quality.

What are the strongest examples of Living Wage reporting?

Looking across the strongest examples of Living Wage reporting, we identified some clear patterns.

The first pattern is that leading companies connect Living Wage to their broader business strategy rather than treating it as a standalone sustainability topic. For example:

• Electrolux integrates adequate wages into its people strategy and HR processes across 53 countries.
• ISS links Living Wage directly to service quality and workforce stability.
• Pandora connects it to talent attraction, brand reputation, and governance.
• And Ingka takes perhaps the most integrated approach, positioning Living Wage as one pillar of its wider Fair Income Framework and linking it to pay equity and responsible sourcing.

The second pattern is that the best reports focus on outcomes, not just intentions. Many companies say they are committed to Living Wage. But stronger reports show measurable results. Electrolux reports that no employees are paid below adequate wage. Pandora reports 99.9% coverage and explains exactly what the remaining gap represents.

The third pattern is transparency of methodology. The strongest reporters explain not only what they measure, but also how they measure it. They disclose benchmarks and make their methodology transparent.

Overall, what distinguishes the strongest reports is not that they mention Living Wage more often — but that they report measurable outcomes and clearly explain how their results are produced.

A separate finding I want to highlight is that WageIndicator is frequently mentioned in Living Wage disclosures. The most common is as a benchmark data source. Companies use WageIndicator data to compare employee wages and assess whether they meet the Living Wage threshold.

Fugro describes it simply: "Benchmark data provided by WageIndicator, a well-known labour market database. INGKA goes further: "The framework includes a consistent methodology for benchmarking and monitoring the living wage in all Ingka Group countries, informed by data from the WageIndicator Foundation — a not-profit organisation that calculates living wages globally.”

Also WageIndicator is described as a trusted partner. ISS puts it this way: "Together with WageIndicator — an independent, non-profit organisation that aims to improve labour market transparency for workers, employers, and policymakers worldwide — we continued our work to establish a common understanding of what constitutes a living wage and how definitions and benchmarks vary across countries."

So finally, what does all of this tell us about the overall state of Living Wage disclosure in annual reports in 2026?

If we look at the results overall, the picture is almost split.

Just over half of the companies report on Living Wage in a meaningful way, reaching either a High or Medium level of disclosure. This suggests that these companies move beyond general statements and provide more structured and detailed data. At the same time, the other half of companies remain at a low or no disclosure level. They either mention Living Wage briefly without any data behind it or do not report on it at all.

On the one hand, many companies are clearly taking Living Wage more seriously, and the topic is becoming part of corporate reporting agendas. But on the other hand, even among stronger performers, there is still significant room for improvement. Much of the disclosure remains broad and vague.

At the same time, the supply chain remains significantly underreported. Companies are becoming more transparent about their own workforce, but workers in the supply chain — who may face the greatest Living Wage risk — still largely remain outside the scope of reporting.

While companies increasingly demonstrate commitment to Living Wage, this is not yet reflected in transparent reporting. The strongest reports show that a high level of Living Wage disclosure is achievable. If companies have a clear commitment and a structured approach, reporting tends to be more transparent and meaningful. And strong examples demonstrate what good practice can look like — and may represent the direction the rest of the field should move toward.

References

Pandora- https://ml-eu.globenewswire.com/Resource/Download/ea9d6adf-a3a0-42be-8f27-a59a5f658b57

Electrolux- https://www.electroluxgroup.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2026/02/Annual-Report-2025.pdf

Fugro- https://annualreport.fugro.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/03/Fugro-Annual-Report-2025.pdf

Ingka - https://assets.site.ingka.com/ingka-com/reports/IngkaGroup_AnnualSummaryandSustainabilityReport_FY25.pdf

ISS - https://inv.issworld.com/static-files/131cfd07-5aff-4f16-b126-e24bcf7cd055