January 31, 2014 – February 7, 2014
The summaries provided in this Weekly Recap do not necessarily represent the views of Squire Sanders (US) LLP and should not be deemed to be endorsements of them. The Recap is intended to be a compilation of articles and events to encourage discussion within the conflict minerals community and to keep our readers updated on the most recent developments.
Update: EU Conflict Minerals Rule
According to a Reuters article titled European Union Seeks to Stem Use of Conflict Minerals , EU Trade Commissioner Karel De Gucht will unveil a voluntary conflict minerals rule this March. The EU rule will encompass the same minerals as its U.S. counterpart; however, the EU rule will likely extend not only to the Democratic Republic of the Congo, but also to Afghanistan, Myanmar and other conflict regions as well. It is important to note that the proposed rule remains under negotiations and could likely change by March.
What Is the Exact Cost of Complying With the Conflict Minerals Rule?
James Carbone, in his article titled, Buyers and Conflict Minerals Reporting, which was published online in Global Purchasing, admits that the exact cost is difficult to determine, but provides the National Association of Manufacturers (NAM) estimates of complying with the conflict minerals rule. NAM estimates that it will take a company two (2) hours per supplier to determine compliance. The average cost of compliance will be $50 per hour. NAM then extrapolates the cost for all manufacturers and believes that the total cost of compliance will be approximately $10 billion.
U.S. Steel Corporation’s Statement on Conflict Minerals
United States Steel Corporation, a steel producer with major production operations in North America and Europe, recently released its 2013 statement on conflict minerals. Excerpts from the statement follow. “The only products produced by U.S. Steel that contain Conflict Minerals and are subject to the legislation are its tin mill products having an electrolytic tin coating. Throughout 2013, U.S. Steel did not use any Conflict Minerals sourced from the DRC or its adjoining countries in products manufactured by U.S. Steel. U.S. Steel will continue to proactively work with its suppliers and customers to verify the source of Conflict Minerals in its supply chain.”