TOMs Sustainability Profile

TOMS presents itself as a brand built around giving and social impact. Its public materials say it has donated shoes, grants, and other support since 2006, and it publishes annual impact reports. It also says it works with nonprofit partners on children’s education, health, and well-being. On the environmental side, the picture is weaker. Good On You rates TOMS’s environment performance as very poor and says there is little evidence of strong action on materials, water use, emissions, or waste. The brand also says it is working on sustainability goals, but the public detail is limited.

Positive Sentiment Found
Public sentiment in the material is strongest around TOMS’s social impact and B Corp status. B Lab lists TOMS as a Certified B Corporation with an overall score of 126.7, which is a high score for a company that has gone through B Lab’s review of social and environmental performance. TOMS’s own impact pages and older press coverage also show a long history of donations, grants, and nonprofit partnerships, which supports a positive reputation for giving back. Some third-party commentary, including The Momentum’s summary of the 2022 report, also highlights its work on diversity, mental health, plastic-free packaging, and Earthwise products. Commons Earth content is more general, but it shows that some consumers value tools that help them compare brands on sustainability.

Common Criticisms:
The clearest criticism comes from Good On You, which rates TOMS’s overall sustainability performance as “Not good enough” and its environment rating as “very poor.” Good On You says there is little evidence of strong action on eco-friendly materials, water reduction, supply-chain emissions, or textile waste. It also says TOMS is not taking adequate steps to ensure a living wage, has limited worker empowerment evidence, and sources final-stage production from countries with extreme labour-abuse risk. Consumer sentiment on Trustpilot is also weak for the main TOMS store pages, with ratings of 1.2 out of 5 from 270 reviews and 1.3 out of 5 from 448 reviews on separate pages. Those reviews focus on service and product quality, not sustainability directly, but they still point to a poor public reputation overall.