If you've no account register here first time
User Name :
User Email :
Password :

Login Now

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

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.


Staying Ahead of the Curve: Strategies for Managing Emerging Regulations (NAEM)
Sponsored By: VelocityEHS

Just the Facts: 8 Popular Misconceptions about LEDs & Controls
Sponsored By: Digital Lumens

Powerful Byte - Strategies to Ingest, Digest High-Frequency Data
Sponsored By: Sphera Solutions

Stormwater Management Programs: How to Integrate New Technologies to Improve Processes and Operations
Sponsored By: VelocityEHS


One thought on “Manufacturers Win if Conflict Minerals Requirements Are Axed – But That’s Not Likely

  1. Without debating the merits of Dodd-Frank generally, it is highly questionable to state that manufacturers have been disadvantaged by the conflict minerals provisions. If the provisions are repealed or amended, we are likely to see major OEMs require essentially the same due diligence as a specification or purchase requirement. That is a far less desirable arrangement as we will see some smaller companies in the value chain “opt out” and there will be gaps in the due diligence. The responsible sourcing ship has sailed and the U.S. Congress will be unable to bring it back with a piece of legislation.

Leave a Comment

Translate »