Beyoncé officially joins Taylor Swift and other billionaire musicians. But the Cowboy Carter singer has come under fire after reports surfaced that her Ivy Park clothing line used workers in Sri Lanka, earning just £4.30 ($5.00) a day.
The allegations centre on seamstresses, mostly young women from rural areas, who work long hours under strict conditions to produce the high-street sportswear collection sold in collaboration with Topshop.
While Ivy Park denies the allegations, claiming strict ethical oversight, many fans and critics have taken to social media to call out the singer's business practices, questioning whether her fortune comes at the expense of exploited labour.
Just a reminder the workers in her clothing line's factories in Sri Lanka are paid barely $0.5/hr AND are forced to work 10 hours a day https://t.co/bcKNiTvRnG
— James (@james_enchanted) December 29, 2025
Claims of Exploitation
According to reports by Business and Human Rights Centre, workers in the MAS Holdings factory in Sri Lanka faced 10-hour days and lived in company boarding houses with a 10:30pm curfew. Campaigners described the conditions as exploitative, with staff fearful of speaking out due to the risk of losing their jobs. Critics emphasised the disparity between the clothing's marketed image of 'empowerment' and the harsh reality for those producing it.
Ivy Park responded to the allegations, stating that the label operates a 'rigorous ethical trading programme' with ongoing audits and inspections. A spokesperson added that suppliers are expected to meet a strict code of conduct, and the company supports them in maintaining these standards.
New 'Unethical' Billionaire?
The news triggered strong reactions online, with many Twitter users pinpointing the contradictions between Beyoncé's billionaire status and the low wages of the workers making her clothing. One user argued there is no such thing as an 'ethical billionaire', noting that reaching that level of wealth typically involves exploiting others.
Another called Beyoncé 'a thief and the most unethical musician ever', linking the criticisms to claims of CO2 emissions, combined with husband Jay-Z, and alleged misuse of intellectual property.
'Ofc Beyoncé would eventually become a billionaire bc she: ✅ Uses sweatshops on her clothing line ✅ Steals music from hundreds of other artists ✅ Uses the most CO2 Emissions among artists', said one user.
Other users pointed out the systemic nature of the issue, noting that exploitation is common in the fashion industry and not unique to Beyoncé. They argued that criticism often targets public figures while the larger structural issues remain unchallenged.
'Whether it's her or Taylor or The Weeknd it doesn't matter, it's not ethical whatsoever. But it's a systemic issue and the people above them are the true proponents of this disparity'.
Some even referenced similar practices in other celebrity merchandise.
Ivy Park's Alleged Wage is Not Low in Sri Lanka
A few commenters attempted to offer context, noting that the reported wages, while low, were legally permitted in Sri Lanka.
'Don't care. Complain to their government for allowing it. Oh wait, you can't. Sri Lanka's government doesn't care, so you attack ONE black woman when thousands of companies have always used cheap labor. Your concern will not leave Twitter'.
Some also clarified that Beyoncé does not directly manage factory operations and that Ivy Park production is largely overseen by Adidas, with recent collaborations following industry norms.
One user explained that the clothing line in question had ceased operations a few years ago.
'Parkwood immediately stopped working with them & haven't had anything like this happen since. She doesn't have her own clothing brand; she had Ivy Park which would have been produced by Adidas and she currently has a merch line which is almost never fully self-produced'.
A shared sentiment, however, is that billionaires' fortunes are always tied to exploitative practices. Some cited Swift, who mass-releases physical album variants, and the Kardashians, who have 'sketchy' businesses and capitalise on women's insecurities.
