Business Groups Fully Brief “Conflict Minerals” Legal Challenge

Several business groups challenging new rules that require companies to disclose whether their products contain minerals blamed for fueling violence in Africa said Wednesday regulators hadn’t adequately analyzed the rules’ impact.

The groups said in court papers that the Securities and Exchange Commission had itself admitted it didn’t know if the rules would benefit the people of the Democratic Republic of the Congo and its surrounding region, the stated intent of Congress in creating the provision.

“Thus, the Commission violated its statutory obligations to apprise itself of the costs and benefits of the rule and the available regulatory alternatives before saddling U.S. public companies with billions of dollars in regulatory burdens,” the groups said. “This failure of analysis infects the entire rule.”

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the National Association of Manufacturers and the Business Roundtable asked the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit to vacate the “conflict-mineral” rules in October. The groups fully explained their arguments for the first time on Wednesday in a 75-page brief.

UPDATE: John Nester, a spokesman for the SEC, defended the Commission’s analysis in an email.

“We believe our legal interpretation and economic analysis are sound, and we look forward to defending the rule that Congress directed us to write,” Nester said.

The “conflict minerals” rules, which were mandated by the 2010 Dodd-Frank financial overhaul, have been a source of friction between the SEC and companies ever since the law was passed. Under the current rules, U.S.-listed companies are required to disclose whether their products have been manufactured with any tantalum, tin, gold or tungsten used to finance violence in central Africa.

Companies have said the requirement would be burdensome and expensive. In August, the SEC estimated the rules would cost companies a total of $3 billion to $4 billion upfront to comply, plus more than $200 million a year. The SEC also estimated around 6,000 U.S. and foreign companies would have to comply with the conflict-minerals rules, affecting manufacturers of a range of products, including smartphones, light bulbs and footwear.

On Wednesday, the groups said that the SEC’s estimates are actually low, and that a financial burden of that size shouldn’t be imposed without determining whether the rules will yield any benefits. The SEC’s lack of analysis, according to the groups, violates the Administrative Procedure Act and the agency’s heightened obligation under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 to analyze the economic impact of its rules.

The groups also argued that the rules violate companies’ First Amendment rights by compelling them to publicly state their products are “not DRC conflict free,” that is, they contain conflict minerals.

“Even worse, this compelled disclosure will frequently be false,” the groups argued. “Many of the companies forced to make it will not be manufacturing products containing minerals that funded armed groups. Rather, the companies will simply be unable to trace their supply chains to determine the minerals’ origins.”

Tungsten Manufacturer & Supplier: Chinatungsten Online - http://www.chinatungsten.com
Tel.: 86 592 5129696; Fax: 86 592 5129797
Email: sales@chinatungsten.com
Tungsten News & Tungsten Prices, 3G Version: http://3g.chinatungsten.com
Tungsten News & Tungsten Prices, WML Version: http://m.chinatungsten.com

• < Prev
• Next >