Serial No. 114-61: Dodd-Frank Five Years Later, What Have We Learned from Conflict Minerals Reporting? Hearing Before the Subcommittee on Monetary Policy and Trade of the Committee on Financial Services, U.S. House of Representatives, One Hundred Fourteenth Congress, First Session, November 17, 2015   [open pdf - 28MB]

This is the November 17, 2015 hearing held before the House of Representatives Subcommittee on Monetary Policy and Trade, "Dodd-Frank Five Years Later: What Have We Learned from Conflict Minerals Reporting?" From the statement of Jeff Schwartz: "Today, I would like to share with the Subcommittee the primary findings of that study and several policy recommendations that stem therefrom (the full study is attached as Appendix A). Overall, I conclude that the Conflict Minerals Rule is a failure in its current form, because the filings that companies have submitted to the SEC [U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission] in response do not provide sufficient insight into conflict mineral supply chains, or company due diligence efforts related thereto, for consumers and shareholders to discern which companies are committed to conflict-free sourcing. I suggest, however, that amendments to the Rule (some of them relatively minor), or even SEC guidance on how the current regulations should be interpreted, could greatly increase transparency without increasing compliance costs. First, I will briefly describe the methodology of the study, then I will describe my findings and policy recommendations." Statements, letters, and other materials submitted for the record include the following: Michele Thoren Bond, David Goldman, and Paul Toland.

Report Number:
Serial No. 114--61
Public Domain
Retrieved From:
Government Printing Office: http://www.gpo.gov/
Media Type:
application/x-shockwave-flash; application/pdf
Help with citations