Conflict Minerals Reporting Requirements
Corporate Law Report: Workplace Romances, FMLA Changes, California Tax News, and More
The New SEC Conflict Minerals Rule: Overcoming the Challenges of Compliance
Development International has posted its most recent Conflict Minerals Benchmarking Study, analyzing the results of filings for the 2016 filing period. The study looked at filings submitted by the 1,153 issuers that had filed...more
In the Spring 2017 issue of our Corporate Communicator, we included a brief discussion of the status of the conflict minerals rules contained in Rule 13p-1 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange...more
On April 7, 2017, the Securities and Exchange Commission ("SEC") Division of Corporate Finance (the "Division") indicated that it will not recommend enforcement of the conflict minerals source and chain of custody due...more
Late Friday, April 7, the SEC issued two statements relating to the conflict minerals rule which reflect a significant change in the staff’s guidance for public companies. The upshot of these statements is that the staff...more
Today, the D.C. District Court entered final judgment in National Association of Manufacturers v. SEC, holding that Section 1502 of Dodd-Frank and Rule 13p-1 and Form SD, Conflict Minerals, violate the First Amendment to the...more
Pursuant to a court order, the parties to the conflict minerals case have filed a proposed judgment after they advised the court no further proceedings were necessary. The text of the proposed judgment is as follows...more
The parties to the conflict minerals case have filed in the D.C. District Court a “Joint Status Report,” which requests that the Court enter a final judgment in accordance with the decision of the Court of Appeals. As a...more
The conflict minerals case was remanded to the United Stated District Court for the District of Columbia for further proceedings. Judge Jackson ordered the parties to file a joint status report indicating whether any further...more
The conflict minerals case was remanded to the United Stated District Court for the District of Columbia for further proceedings. Judge Jackson has ordered the parties to file a joint status report, on or before March 10,...more
Yesterday, Acting SEC Chair Michael Piwowar issued two statements on the conflict minerals rules, neither of which is definitive, but which together make clear that further guidance on the rules is in the offing and that it...more
SEC Acting Chairman Michael S. Piwowar issued a “Statement on the Commission’s Conflict Minerals Rule” and another statement titled “Reconsideration of Conflict Minerals Rule Implementation.” Chairman Piwowar reviewed...more
The WSJ is reporting that, contrary to all expectations (including my own), “the U.S. Chamber of Commerce isn’t planning to mount a legal challenge to the Securities and Exchange Commission’s pay ratio rule.”...more
The Sixth Circuit last week concluded that Morrison, which held that Section 10(b) does not have extraterritorial reach, is inapplicable to Advisers Act Section 10(b). The DC Circuit, on rehearing, reaffirmed its prior...more
The SEC’s conflict mineral disclosure rule, enacted under Dodd-Frank, is a continuing source of controversy. An initial challenge to the rules was brought by the National Association of Manufactures. That challenge was...more
Pursuant to Section 1502 of the Dodd-Frank Act, which added new Section 13(p)(1) to the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, the SEC promulgated Rule 13p-1 (the “Conflict Minerals Rule”), which required that issuers...more
On August 18, 2015, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit reaffirmed its April 2014 decision in NAM v. SEC, where it held that certain portions of the SEC’s conflict minerals reporting requirements unconstitutionally...more
On August 18, 2015, the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit reaffirmed its ruling in National Association of Manufacturers v. Securities and Exchange Commission that portions of the SEC’s...more
The Commission filed another settled FCPA action this week. The proceeding named two U.S. citizens living abroad as Respondents. The DOJ issued an Opinion discussing successor liability....more
In April 2014, the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia held the SEC’s conflict minerals rule and statute embodied in Dodd-Frank violate the First Amendment to the extent the statute and rule require...more
If your company manufactures consumer electronics, avionics, or any product incorporating even trace amounts of gold, coltan, cassiterite, or wolframite— including their derivatives, tantalum, tin, and tungsten—you may need...more
Section 1502 of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (2010) added Section 13(p) to the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the Exchange Act), mandating that the SEC adopt regulations relating...more
The D.C. Circuit attracted plenty of attention by ruling that one of the SEC’s conflict mineral disclosure rules – promulgated pursuant to a specific Congressional mandate in the Dodd-Frank Act – violated the First Amendment....more
When Commissioners Daniel M. Gallagher and Michael S. Piwowar released this Joint Statement on the Conflict Minerals Decision on April 28, 2014, I wondered where it would go. ...more
On April 14, 2014, the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia issued its decision in the pending court challenge to the conflict minerals rule. The rule was promulgated in 2012 by the Securities and...more
Last week, in the case of National Association of Manufacturers v. Securities and Exchange Commission, the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals held that the SEC's conflict minerals rule adopted pursuant to the Dodd-Frank Wall...more