• May 20, 2014, 3:36 AM ET

Companies Unearth Few Answers on ‘Conflict Minerals’

In the next few weeks, some 6,000 U.S.-listed companies are expected to release lots of detail about their supply chains—but few conclusions—in the first reports required by law on whether their products contain “conflict minerals.”

Read More About:
 
The CFO Report HOME PAGE

Add a Comment

We welcome thoughtful comments from readers. Please comply with our guidelines. Our blogs do not require the use of your real name.

Comments (5 of 7)

View all Comments »
      • 12:01 pm June 4, 2014
      • David wrote:

      In it incorrect that compliance can be effortless with minimal expense. I guess we need to define “minimal”, but I would say my company has spend $300 – 400K and we re far from the answer …

      • 4:06 pm May 21, 2014
      • John Logan wrote:

      Many companies experienced difficulties during the first year of Conflict Minerals understanding what the SEC was requiring and determining which of their products were in-scope for the regulation. That stage is now done. Beginning this year, companies are focusing on efficiently validating supplier data and moving their supply chains toward using audited, conflict-free smelters.

      • 3:06 pm May 21, 2014
      • stevecorreia wrote:

      There are solutions that can make this compliance effortless with minimal expense. The SEC and NGO’s will not tolerate inaction.

      • 3:05 pm May 21, 2014
      • Rob Kasameyer wrote:

      Dramatically different regulations typically have a difficult first year – see S-Ox. For Conflict Minerals, many companies have taken the first year to let the dust settle, and there was plenty as described in the article. Year 2 will see more company investment, focusing on efficiently and effectively automating the conflict minerals reporting process.

      • 8:59 pm May 20, 2014
      • RebelLawyer wrote:

      Companies are wasting time and resources in attempting to comply. There is another SEC rule, Rule 12b-21, that says a company need not report any information that it does not possess and cannot obtain without unreasonable expense and effort. That is how every company should respond to the reporting requirement: “The information cannot be provided without undue effort and expense.”

Content from our sponsor

Deloitte

  • Reassessing IP Strategies in a Disruptive Age

    The convergence of technology acceleration and patent reform has created an urgent need for business leaders, including CFOs, to reassess their IP strategies. As patent wars and the challenges of protecting IP expand beyond technology and pharmaceutical companies into previously untouched sectors, CFOs can master the dimensions of IP management by staying up to date on current legislative responses, understanding how technology has disrupted the patent process and by learning the nine dimensions of a robust IP management process.

  • Read more about: Governance, Management, Regulatory, Risk
  • Read more from Deloitte »

  • Please note: The Wall Street Journal News Department was not involved in the creation of the content above.

About The CFO Report

  • The CFO Report provides original real-time reporting, analysis and commentary on news and trends of critical importance to chief financial officers and other senior corporate finance executives: accounting, tax, regulation, capital markets, banking, management and strategy. The CFO Report is a core component of CFO Journal, which aggregates articles and data from The Wall Street Journal and other premium sources. Contact our editors with news items, comments and questions at: cfoeditors@dowjones.com.

    Learn about the CFO Journal editorial team.

    • The CFO Report on Facebook

The CFO Report Categories

Search for CFO Report Articles