On April 3, 2017, the D.C. District Court affirmed the 2014 decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, striking down part of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission’s (“SEC”) conflict minerals rules that require publicly-traded companies to disclose whether their products contain certain minerals from certain central African countries.
Pursuant to Section 1502 of the Dodd-Frank Act, the SEC promulgated new disclosure and reporting requirements concerning the use of certain conflict minerals (tantalum, tin, tungsten and gold) originating in the Democratic Republic of the Congo and certain adjoining countries (each a “Covered Country”). The new rule requires reporting companies to disclose whether conflict minerals are present in their products, whether they originated in a Covered Country, and the extent of the company’s due diligence effort with respect to the inquiries made and the measurers taken to determine the origin of the minerals and whether the products are conflict free. Reporting companies must file their annual Form SD and, depending upon the outcome of the due diligence, a Conflict Minerals Report, by the June 1, 2015 deadline. As companies prepare for the second year of filings, and in light of the pending litigation challenging the rule, many companies are looking for guidance.
On April 14, 2014 the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit struck down part of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission’s (“SEC”) controversial new “Conflict Minerals Rules” requiring publicly-traded companies to disclose whether their products contain certain minerals from certain central African countries. Despite this decision, until further notice public companies should continue to carry out efforts to comply with the SEC’s rules.
Topics/Tags
Select- Securities Law
- SEC
- Securities Regulation
- Cybersecurity and Privacy Law
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- Coronavirus
- Economic Sanctions
- Ohio LLC Act
- Cybersecurity Regulation
- Nasdaq
- Corporate Law
- Tax Planning
- Corporate Tax
- Paycheck Protection Program
- Dodd-Frank
- IRS
- JOBS Act
- FAST Act
- Proxy Access Rules
- Securities Litigation
- Consumer Protection Act
- Corporate Governance
- SEC Enforcement
- Crowdfunding
- Cryptocurrency
- Taxation
- Hedging
- Private Offerings
- Real Estate Law
- Conflict Minerals
- Emerging Growth Companies
- Investors
- Pay Ratio Disclosure
- Intellectual Property
- Technology
- Whistleblower
- Opportunity Zone
- LIBOR
- Accredited Investors
- Sales Tax
- United States Supreme Court
- Online Trading Platforms
- IPO
- Registration Statement
- Executive Compensation
- Health Care Act
- Annual Reports
- Ohio Foreclosure Reform
- Family-Controlled Entities
- Gift and Estate Transfers
- Director Compensation
- Wall Street Reform
- Board of Directors
- Director Independence
- Clawback Rules
- Total Shareholder Return
- Cyber Insurance
- Data Breach
- Lenders
- Receivership Statute
- Regulation A
- Regulation D
- Compensation Committee Certification
- Government Shutdown
- CDEs
- CDFI Fund
- Community Development Entities
- Community Development Financial Institutions Fund
- New Markets Tax Credit
- NMTC
- NMTC Financing
- Regulation Fair Disclosure
- Social Media
- Benefits
- Healthcare Reform
- Litigation
- Marketing
- Public Company Transition Rules
- Tax Credit
- Employment Incentives
- HIRE Act
- Social Security Tax
Recent Posts
- SEC Provides Sample Guidance on Disclosure of Russia-Ukraine Invasion
- Proposed SEC Climate-Related Disclosure Requirements
- Proposed SEC Cybersecurity Rules
- International Unrest and its Impact on M&A
- The United States Ramps Up Severe Economic Sanctions on Russia and Export Controls
- Revised Ohio LLC Statute
- Beware of ‘Spring-Loaded’ Awards: SEC Issues Updated Accounting Guidance
- SEC Opens Floodgates for ESG Proposals
- NYSE Proposes an Amendment to the Shareholder Voting Requirement
- SEC Charges Pearson plc for Misleading Investors About Cyber Breach and Inadequate Disclosure Controls