abusesaffiliationarrow-downarrow-leftarrow-rightarrow-upattack-typeburgerchevron-downchevron-leftchevron-rightchevron-upClock iconclosedeletedevelopment-povertydiscriminationdollardownloademailenvironmentexternal-linkfacebookfiltergenderglobegroupshealthC4067174-3DD9-4B9E-AD64-284FDAAE6338@1xinformation-outlineinformationinstagraminvestment-trade-globalisationissueslabourlanguagesShapeCombined Shapeline, chart, up, arrow, graphLinkedInlocationmap-pinminusnewsorganisationotheroverviewpluspreviewArtboard 185profilerefreshIconnewssearchsecurityPathStock downStock steadyStock uptagticktooltiptwitteruniversalityweb

このページは 日本語 では利用できません。English で表示されています

ストーリー

2020年3月2日

USA: Publish What You Pay calls on extractive companies to comment on latest SEC payment disclosure rules; including company responses

On 15 January 2020, the U.S. Securities & Exchange Commission (SEC) released the latest proposed rule to implement Section 1504 of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act. Section 1504 requires companies operating in the extractives sector and listed on US stock exchanges to disclose payments to governments. For more background on the SEC's drafting process, and criticism it received from anticorruption groups, see our previous story on the topic.

Publish What You Pay (PWYP) urged companies committed to the principles of the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI) and listed on US stock exchanges to comment on the SEC's proposed rule. In an open letter, PWYP argued that this rule would deviate significantly from the EITI global transparency standard, particularly in its definition of project-level reporting, and "would be a marked step backwards in the global movement to ensure that stakeholders have access to relevant information about the extraction and sale of their country's natural resource wealth."

PWYP invited 25 oil, gas and mining companies to answer the following two questions:

  • Does your company support the EITI Standard's definition of project-level reporting?
  • Do you agree that this definition should be adopted by the SEC in its final rule?

We invited AngloGold Ashanti, ArcelorMittal, Barrick Gold, BHP, BP, Chevron, ConocoPhillips, Eni, Equinor, ExxonMobil, Freeport-McMoRan, Gold Fields, Hess Corporation, Hudbay, IAMGOLD, Kinross, Kosmos Energy, Marathon Oil, Newmont, Noble Energy, Petrobras, Rio Tinto, Shell, Total and Vale to respond. Their responses or non-responses are recorded below.

企業への回答リクエスト

ConocoPhillips 回答を見る
ExxonMobil 回答を見る
Gold Fields 回答を見る
Chevron 回答を見る
TotalEnergies (formerly Total) 回答を見る
Shell plc 回答を見る
Rio Tinto 回答を見る
Kosmos Energy 回答を見る
Kinross Gold 回答を見る
Freeport-McMoRan 回答を見る
Equinor (formerly Statoil) 回答を見る
Petrobras

回答無し

Noble Energy

回答無し

Newmont (formerly Newmont Goldcorp) 回答を見る
Marathon Oil

回答無し

Iamgold Corporation

回答無し

Hess Corporation

回答無し

Hudbay Minerals 回答を見る
AngloGold Ashanti

回答無し

ArcelorMittal 回答を見る

タイムライン