US adds BGI Group and two affiliates to forced-labor import list

The U.S. Department of Homeland Security added BGI Group and two related companies to a federal list that carries an effective ban on imports from them, according to arcamax.com. The move applies to the Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act Entity List and cites forced labor. A Federal Register notice announcing the additions was posted Wednesday, the outlet reported.

The listed companies are BGI Group, its publicly traded genomics-testing unit BGI Genomics Co, and MGI Tech Co., which the outlet describes as a spinoff. The measure therefore names the parent company and two associated genomics businesses, rather than describing a restriction on the entire Chinese genomics sector.

Arcamax.com reported that both companies said their U.S. activities make up only a limited share of their overall businesses. Neither company reports U.S. sales separately, leaving their direct U.S. revenue figures unspecified in the account. The companies’ reported regional figures offer some context for their exposure beyond the United States.

BGI Genomics said the Americas accounted for less than 2% of its 2025 revenue. MGI said about 8% of its revenue came from the Americas and warned that geopolitical pressures were weighing on its business. The account does not break down either company’s sales within the Americas by country.

The outlet also said the companies had pursued global expansion but struggled to establish a foothold in the United States. That description sits alongside their statements that U.S. activity remains a limited part of their businesses; the reported revenue shares, however, cover the broader Americas region, not the United States alone.

Bloomberg’s headline describes the action as a ban on BGI and MGI, while headlines from MarketScreener, The Kansas City Star, CNA and AOL.co.uk describe an import ban affecting three Chinese genomics companies. Investing.com’s headline likewise refers to three genomics firms and forced labor.

These headlines identify the same general measure but do not add details about the Federal Register notice, the companies’ revenue figures or their statements about U.S. activity. The account describes the measure as one of the more striking uses to date of a law intended to block goods allegedly made with forced labor from entering the United States.

It does not provide separate explanations for the government’s decision to list each company. The reported information therefore identifies the companies, the legal list and the stated business exposure, but does not detail the evidence cited for each listing.