French Sapin II Law (Law No. 2016-1691)vsGerman Supply Chain Due Diligence Act (LkSG)
See exactly how French Sapin II Law (Law No. 2016-1691) controls map to German Supply Chain Due Diligence Act (LkSG). Pre-computed mappings, identified gaps, and coverage analysis.
Need this as a report you can hand to an assessor? A coverage crosswalk for this pair can be built to order.
According to the TheArtOfService Compliance Knowledge Graph:
French Sapin II Law (Law No. 2016-1691) maps to German Supply Chain Due Diligence Act (LkSG) with 14% coverage across 2 directly mapped controls. Analysis of 14 French Sapin II Law (Law No. 2016-1691) controls identifies 12 compliance gaps, primarily concentrated in Sapin II: HATVP Lobbying Register, Coordination with EU Whistleblower Directive + CSDDD + Status.
Source: TheArtOfService Knowledge Graph | 14 controls analysed | 686 frameworks | 310K+ cross-framework mappings
Control Mappings
Showing 5 of 5 mapped controls across 1 domains. Sign up to explore all 310K+ mappings across 686 frameworks.
Sapin II: Pillars 3+4 - Corruption Risk Mapping and Third-Party Due Diligence(5 mappings)
A French Sapin II Law (Law No. 2016-1691) to German Supply Chain Due Diligence Act (LkSG) crosswalk, built to order
The table above lists candidate mappings. A crosswalk answers the narrower question you are probably here for: which German Supply Chain Due Diligence Act (LkSG) controls your existing French Sapin II Law (Law No. 2016-1691) work already satisfies, which are real gaps, and the reasoning behind every claim so you can check it. One pair, $299, one time.
This direction has not been through crosswalk review and sign off, so no coverage figure is published for it. Reporting an unreviewed number would be worse than reporting none. It can be built to order at the same price as a pair that is already on the shelf.
If the two frameworks turn out to have too little in common for a crosswalk to help you, we say so and refund it rather than send a number worth nothing.
This direction has not been through crosswalk review and sign off, so no coverage figure is published for it. Reporting an unreviewed number would be worse than reporting none. It can be built to order at the same price as a pair that is already on the shelf.
If the two frameworks turn out to have too little in common for a crosswalk to help you, we say so and refund it rather than send a number worth nothing.
- Every evidenced control, with the reasoning behind it
- Every gap, with what it requires
- Its level of review stated plainly, not a bare number
Why this page shows two different percentages. The 14% in the header counts how many French Sapin II Law (Law No. 2016-1691) controls carry at least one candidate mapping in the graph, before any review. The crosswalk percentage counts something stricter: how many German Supply Chain Due Diligence Act (LkSG) controls are actually evidenced, after a pass that argued against each mapping and kept only what survived. They answer different questions and they are not meant to agree.
A crosswalk narrows the work. It does not replace an audit, and your assessor may take a different view on individual controls. Mappings between frameworks are judgements, not text printed in either standard, which is why every claim in the report shows its reasoning. Questions go to support@theartofservice.com.
Related Comparisons
Other French Sapin II Law (Law No. 2016-1691) comparisons
Other German Supply Chain Due Diligence Act (LkSG) comparisons
Stop Paying Consultants to Read Spreadsheets
AI-powered compliance intelligence across 686 frameworks, at a fraction of consulting costs.
Free
- ✓ 686 framework browser
- ✓ Cross-framework mappings (310K+)
- ✓ 824 compliance assessments
- ✓ 3 AI queries & searches per day
Professional
- ✓ Unlimited AI Compliance Advisory
- ✓ Unlimited full-text search
- ✓ Framework self-assessment
- ✓ PDF, Excel & CSV exports
What are the key differences between French Sapin II Law (Law No. 2016-1691) and German Supply Chain Due Diligence Act (LkSG)?
French Sapin II Law (Law No. 2016-1691) has 14 controls across its framework, while German Supply Chain Due Diligence Act (LkSG) covers 11 controls. Direct mapping analysis identifies 2 overlapping controls (14% coverage). The frameworks diverge most significantly in Sapin II: HATVP Lobbying Register, Coordination with EU Whistleblower Directive + CSDDD + Status, where 3 French Sapin II Law (Law No. 2016-1691) controls have no direct German Supply Chain Due Diligence Act (LkSG) equivalent.
How many controls map between French Sapin II Law (Law No. 2016-1691) and German Supply Chain Due Diligence Act (LkSG)?
Of 14 total French Sapin II Law (Law No. 2016-1691) controls, 2 map directly to German Supply Chain Due Diligence Act (LkSG) controls, representing 14% coverage. The remaining 12 controls represent compliance gaps requiring additional documentation or compensating controls to satisfy both frameworks simultaneously.
What are the compliance gaps when mapping French Sapin II Law (Law No. 2016-1691) to German Supply Chain Due Diligence Act (LkSG)?
12 French Sapin II Law (Law No. 2016-1691) controls have no direct equivalent in German Supply Chain Due Diligence Act (LkSG). The highest concentration of gaps is in Sapin II: HATVP Lobbying Register, Coordination with EU Whistleblower Directive + CSDDD + Status with 3 unmapped controls. These gaps represent areas where additional controls, policies, or documentation must be created to achieve compliance with both frameworks.
Which control domains have the most gaps between French Sapin II Law (Law No. 2016-1691) and German Supply Chain Due Diligence Act (LkSG)?
The domain with the highest gap count is Sapin II: HATVP Lobbying Register, Coordination with EU Whistleblower Directive + CSDDD + Status (3 gaps). Export the full domain-by-domain gap breakdown via the Professional tier to generate a prioritised remediation roadmap.
Related Resources
This platform provides educational compliance tools, not legal, regulatory, or professional compliance advice. Cross-framework mappings are AI-assisted interpretations and do not reproduce or replace official standards. Framework names and trademarks belong to their respective owners. Consult qualified professionals for your specific compliance requirements. See our Terms of Service.