datasheets.com EBN.com EDN.com EETimes.com Embedded.com PlanetAnalog.com TechOnline.com TMWorld.com  
Events ▼
UBM Tech
UBM Tech ▼
VELOCITY     Accelerating Your Supply Chain Success
The leader in global supply chain solutions

Jan 31: D-Day for Conflict Minerals Compliance

NO RATINGS

Raw materials are in the headlines again, and it's not for rising costs this time. Instead, electronic companies are scrambling to meet the January 31 Securities & Exchange Commission deadline for reporting on "conflict minerals" -- gold, tin, tantalum, and tungsten -- that have entered the supply chain.

It isn't as simple as filling out a quick form and forgetting about it; most companies lack the information, processes, and technology needed to adhere to the new SEC reporting standard. Compliance won't be easy or cheap. According to Deloitte, "The SEC has estimated it will cost U.S. businesses between $3 billion and $4 billion to implement processes to comply with "the rule."

Right now, affected companies are asking suppliers these seemingly basic questions:

  • Do you provide our company with any products manufactured with tin, tantalum, tungsten, gold, or any other conflict minerals?

  • If so, do you source any raw materials from the Democratic Republic of the Congo or surrounding regions?
Yet, the answers are nearly impossible to find. At the heart of the problem is supplier relationship management 101. Companies have relied, for too long, on incomplete supplier data that is scattered throughout various ERP and SRM tools -- or worse, hidden away in filing cabinets. Coupled with Tier-1 and Tier-2 suppliers thousands of miles away, the biggest tech companies are disconnected from what's really going on throughout the supply chain.

My hope is that there is a silver lining to this new level of reporting: Companies should be compelled to gain this level of visibility into the supply chain for every raw material, facility, and product, reducing costs and risks.

View comments: newest first | oldest first | threaded
Page 1 of 2   Next >   Last >>
Bolaji Ojo
User Rank
Blogger
Re: Is it that big?
Bolaji Ojo   1/31/2013 9:02:01 PM
NO RATINGS

Sparky, The SEC doesn't need authority over private companies to impact them here. The companies that use the conflict minerals are the ones who will be doing most of the monitoring -- of their supply base. These companies need to confirm that their suppliers are not in violation of the law. It wouldn't matter whether your company is private or public; if you sell components to any of the companies overseen by the SEC you will be impacted.

Of course, you are right. The SEC does not have authority over private companies but it's a myth to think the SEC still doesn't get involved in their business. If they are big enough to get involved in any financial transactions managed by companies over which the SEC has authority then they get indirectly supervised.

Sparky the Wonder Cat
User Rank
Stock Keeper
Re: Is it that big?
Sparky the Wonder Cat   1/31/2013 7:51:01 PM
NO RATINGS

Bolaji: All companies that sell to the United States are similarly impacted.

Sparky: Correction - Only PUBLICLY TRADED companies that sell to the United States are similary impacted.

 
  • At this writing I am not aware of the SEC having any authority over privately held companies in the U.S., much less globally. Please advise if you find otherwise.

 

Rich Krajewski
User Rank
Supply Network Guru
Re: Is it that big?
Rich Krajewski   1/31/2013 7:08:36 PM
NO RATINGS

"China is not ready to enforce that regulation,...."

It was just that possibility that made me wonder how effective this will be, although I understand and support the reason behind regulating conflict minerals (presuming that the display of justice is not intended to hide another motive underneath).

paulmartyn
User Rank
Stock Keeper
Re: Compliance Monitoring
paulmartyn   1/31/2013 5:11:24 PM
NO RATINGS

Yes, but we have exhausted the 'grace period', the rule went into effect on 1 Jan and companies had until 31 Jan to conduct a review of their suppliers.

The first reporting period will be from January 1, 2013 to December 31, 2013, and the first disclosure report must be filed on or before May 31, 2014. 
With 'out of supply network' conflict minerals exempted prior to Jan 31, 2013.

You can download the SEC Ruling here: http://www.sec.gov/rules/final/2012/34-67716.pdf

 

 

Bolaji Ojo
User Rank
Blogger
Re:
Bolaji Ojo   1/31/2013 4:52:07 PM
NO RATINGS

TaimoorZ, Some of the costs will be borne by companies and some by consumers if manufacturers are able to pass these on to their clients. It's not easy to tabulate the cost of compliance, though.

TaimoorZ
User Rank
Supply Network Guru
Re: Compliance Monitoring
TaimoorZ   1/31/2013 4:31:58 PM
NO RATINGS

@Bolaji: I think the companies would never be ready. It's in their interest to delay it as much as possible. I think if the regulations are imposed and a fine is imposed along side, that will serve to motivate the companies more to take quick actions.

TaimoorZ
User Rank
Supply Network Guru
Re:
TaimoorZ   1/31/2013 4:28:16 PM
NO RATINGS

@Bolaji: Any idea about the economic impact of this? How much will countries lose out on if they go with this. Who would pay for the extra cost?

Hospice_Houngbo
User Rank
Supply Network Guru
Re:
Hospice_Houngbo   1/31/2013 3:29:54 PM
NO RATINGS

@prabhakar,

"Is the EU and the Asian countries passing similar restrictions?"

It is important that EU and the US lead that effort, hopefully they will impact other nations a well.

Hospice_Houngbo
User Rank
Supply Network Guru
Re: Is it that big?
Hospice_Houngbo   1/31/2013 3:25:44 PM
NO RATINGS

China is not ready to enforce that regulation, Could there be a pressure from the World Trade Organization (WTO) to make everyone comply?

Bolaji Ojo
User Rank
Blogger
Re:
Bolaji Ojo   1/31/2013 8:14:24 AM
NO RATINGS

The EU is leading efforts to exclude conflict minerals from the supply chain. The rest of the world are following (including the U.S., by the way.) I am not aware of similar legislation in China (doubt it) but two other big players in the electronics supply chain (Japan and South Korea) are probably involved.

Page 1 of 2   Next >   Last >>


More Blogs from Paul Martyn
As electronic companies prepare 2013 procurement budgets, they should find ways to highlight the values of effective contract management
Electronic OEMs must understand total cost of ownership and develop a better system for ensuring supplier and contractor compliance.
Adopting a holistic approach to spend analysis in procurement is a viable strategy for maximizing performance throughout the organization.
OEMs and components suppliers should prepare for a more volatile supply chain in 2012, but they can take steps to mitigate the problems.
Latest Poll
Webinars
Archived Webinars
Date: 4/30/2013
You've heard the saying "the No. 1 supply chain risk is your people." That hasn't always been the case. But today's complex global supply chain requires a new type of multitalented employee. It's one who understands, finance, marketing, economics, is savvy with technology, graceful with relationships and can think analytically. Where are these people? Are universities properly preparing the next generation supply chain professionals? How do train your existing workforce for these new, demanding positions? Brian Fuller, editor-in-chief of EBN, will lead a 60-minute Avnet Velocity panel discussion that will ask and answer these and other questions swirling around today's supply-chain talent challenges.
EBN Newswire
SAN FRANCISCO   1/8/2013
Vallee Appointed to Reserve Bank Board
PHOENIX   12/12/2012
Avnet EMA Adds Digi International
PHOENIX   9/26/2012
Avnet Express Appoints Exec
Resources
sponsored content
MORE WHITE PAPERS
Avnet Video Resources
The Velocity Report Archive
Click here to see our newsletter archive.
Twitter Feed
EBN Online Twitter Feed
Like Us on Facebook