Sponsors
The bill reduces compliance costs and regulatory burdens for issuers by eliminating conflict-minerals disclosure requirements but does so at the expense of supply-chain transparency, ESG data availability, and potential pressure to avoid sourcing minerals that fund armed groups, raising human-rights and security concerns.
Publicly traded companies and small issuers face lower compliance costs and reduced administrative burden because they no longer must prepare and file conflict-minerals disclosures.
Investors and consumers lose a public source of supply-chain transparency about whether companies use conflict minerals, reducing accountability and information available to the public.
Communities in conflict zones and U.S. national-security interests could be harmed because weaker disclosure requirements may reduce pressure on companies to avoid sourcing minerals that finance armed groups, potentially worsening human-rights risks abroad.
Investors and financial institutions focused on ESG will have less standardized data for due diligence and investment decisions, complicating sustainable-investing strategies and risk assessment.
Based on analysis of 2 sections of legislative text.
Eliminates the federal requirement that SEC‑filing companies disclose use of conflict minerals by repealing the relevant Securities Exchange Act subsection and removing Dodd‑Frank section 1502.
Introduced January 15, 2026 by Bill Huizenga · Last progress January 15, 2026
Removes the federal legal requirement for public companies to disclose whether their products contain "conflict minerals" by repealing the SEC disclosure provision and striking the Dodd‑Frank Act provision that created the rule. The change eliminates the statutory basis for conflict‑minerals reporting; it does not create new funding, agencies, deadlines, or other regulatory programs.