• 5 minutes Covid-19 logarithmic growth
  • 8 minutes Why Trump Is Right to Re-Open the Economy
  • 12 minutes Charts of COVID-19 Fatality Rate by Age and Sex
  • 14 minutes China Takes Axe To Alternative Energy Funding, Slashing Subsidies For Solar And Wind
  • 50 mins Real Death Toll In CCP Virus May Be 12X Official Toll
  • 12 mins TRUMP pushing Hydroxychloroquine + Zpak therapy forward despite FDA conservative approach. As he reasons, "What have we got to lose ?"
  • 13 hours WE have a suicidal player in the energy industry
  • 3 hours The Most Annoying Person You Have Encountered During Lockdown
  • 4 hours Saudi Aramco struggling to raise money for this year's dividend of $75 billion. Now trying to sell their pipelines for $10 billion.
  • 17 mins Which producers will shut in first?
  • 20 mins How to Create a Pandemic
  • 2 hours A New Solar-Panel Plant Could Have Capacity to Meet Half of Global Demand
  • 4 hours Death Match: Climate Change vs. Coronavirus
  • 17 hours KSA taking Missiles from ?
  • 17 hours Shale Legs
  • 19 hours Washington doctor removed from his post, over covid
Dave Forest

Dave Forest

Dave is Managing Geologist of the Pierce Points Daily E-Letter.

More Info

Premium Content

Does This Critical Shift In Conflict Minerals Law Affect You?

One of the biggest legal shifts in the mining business recently has been conflict minerals law in the U.S.

And this week, the rules took another major turn.

That's because of a ruling from the Washington, D.C. Circuit court on Tuesday. Which struck down large swathes of new rules that the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has been trying to impose around conflict minerals.

Those rules have been evolving since 2010 -- when Dodd-Frank legislation mandated the SEC to take a harder line on conflict materials. With the backbone being forced disclosure about the sources for minerals produced and processed by SEC-registered companies. Related: Oil Prices Must Rebound. Here’s Why

But the D.C. Circuit said this week there's a big problem with those rules. Namely, they force companies to act against the First Amendment right to free speech.

The three-judge panel said in a divided opinion that forcing companies to disclose potential issues in their operations is contrary to the principals of free speech. Related: Fresh Sell Off For Oil. Bear Market Here To Stay?

The judges also noted that the heavy financial burden imposed on companies for conflict reporting was unlikely to reduce the humanitarian problems that prompted the legislation.

For the time being then, it looks as if the burden of conflict reporting will be reduced. Which will give a financial and administrative lift to companies operating in scrutinized locations like the Democratic Republic of Congo. Related: Hungry Venezuela Eyes $40 Billion Offshore Discovery In Guyana

The saga is far from over though. With challenges expected from the SEC and other parties -- who argue that securities law allows compelled disclosure of financials and other business matters, so why not mineral sourcing information.

It's likely this contentious matter will now end up before the U.S. Supreme Court over the coming months. Watch for news on specific cases -- which could have a big impact on the resource business globally.

Here's to resolving the conflict,

Dave Forest

More Top Reads From Oilprice.com:


Download The Free Oilprice App Today

Back to homepage






Leave a comment

Leave a comment




Oilprice - The No. 1 Source for Oil & Energy News