Manufacturers Win if Conflict Minerals Requirements Are Axed – But That’s Not Likely

by | May 2, 2017

This article is included in these additional categories:

Manufacturers stand to win if the current administration succeeds in its efforts to all but repeal The Dodd-Frank Act, which the National Association of Manufacturers (NAM) has called harmful and costly to manufacturers. The Act is being looked at this week by the House Committee on Financial Services. At a hearing, the committee heard draft legislation that would essentially replace the Dodd-Frank Act with a new bill, The Financial CHOICE Act, that would amend some of the provisions that have hampered manufacturers including those focused on conflict minerals.

The Financial CHOICE Act has been designed as an alternative to the 2010 Dodd-Frank Act and “includes several provisions of importance to manufacturers,” according to Shopfloor, NAM’s blog. Complying with the burdensome aspects of the Dodd-Frank’s requirements has been challenging and costly to manufacturers, NAM says.

One of the most burdensome aspects of Dodd-Frank is the requirement for conflict minerals disclosure. The widespread use of the minerals covered by the rule – including tungsten, tantalum, tin and gold – makes it costly for manufacturers to ensure compliance as they navigate the depth and complexity of their supply chains.

Large manufacturers are not the only ones suffering from Dodd-Frank, NAM claims. Small and medium-sized businesses are being asked by their customers to conduct the due diligence required by the rule, though the small companies themselves are not subject to the reporting requirements.

 

 

NAM says it “supports the Committee’s efforts to ease manufacturers’ cost and compliance burden stemming from the Dodd-Frank Act, and calls on Congress to advance these important provisions.”

The new administration had promised to dismantle Dodd-Frank, but that has become increasingly unlikely, according to The Hill. Now, Republican lawmakers are focusing on replacing it with the Financial CHOICE Act, which contains significant changes.

But while the House Financial Services committee is expected to advance the bill to the House floor, analysts say the bill is unlikely to make it to Trump’s desk, writes Business Insider.

 

Additional articles you will be interested in.

Stay Informed

Get E+E Leader Articles delivered via Newsletter right to your inbox!

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Share This