Are the simple European Union conflict materials laws too weak ?

An article in The Guardian (March 26, 2014) titled “Conflict minerals: new EU rules simpler alternative to US regulation” describes draft legislation that is voluntary, requires the manufacturer to determine areas that are conflict afflicted and just requires use of a responsible importer who provides assurance of source. Unlike the US Dodd-Frank law that specifies that tin, tantalum, tungsten and gold should not be from conflict areas, and requires tracking across the supply chain, the European rules are expected to be easier to comply with. Will the European rules decrease costs for nonUS manufacturers or will sales to US companies force European suppliers to adhere to the US version of the conflict material law? Given that the European laws will not apply to products using conflict materials when imported in the Europe, will this change the structure of European supply chains ?

About aviyer2010

This entry was posted in Global Contexts, Operations Management, Supply Chain Issues and tagged , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s