The high cost of a feel-good measure

by Walter Olson on November 1, 2011

“Tulane Study Says SEC Estimate of Cost of Conflict Mineral Rules is 100x Too Low” — headline at Business Law Prof (via Prof. Bainbridge), describing a new calculation that the implementation of the complication Dodd-Frank provision will in fact cost American business upwards of $7 billion, not the $70 million the Securities and Exchange Commission optimistically foresaw. (Typo fixed now.) Earlier here, here (“devastating” effect on Congolese).

{ 16 comments }

1 Kurt 11.01.11 at 10:08 am

I think you mean $ 70 million not billion.

2 captnhal 11.01.11 at 11:33 am

That should read “$70 million”.

3 OBQuiet 11.01.11 at 12:02 pm

I think that should say the estimate was $70 MILLION not billion.

4 John Burgess 11.01.11 at 12:31 pm

Walter: You’ve got a ‘billion’ where ‘$70 million’ should be in your last sentence.

5 Mark Phaedrus 11.01.11 at 12:39 pm

Rather important typo: “not the $70 billion” should be “not the $70 million.”

6 Chad 11.01.11 at 12:48 pm

This should be $70 million, not billion, right?

7 OL fan 11.01.11 at 1:27 pm

Walter, I think you meant to say that the optimistic assessment was $70 Million, not Billion. It’s correct in the article

8 Ron 11.01.11 at 1:31 pm

CORRECTION: original cost estimates were $70 million – not the $70 billion in the post.

9 Mike 11.01.11 at 1:31 pm

The optimistic forecast was $70 million, not billion (1/100 of $7B)

10 gitarcarver 11.01.11 at 1:39 pm

….upwards of $7 billion, not the $70 billion the….

Shouldn’t that read “$70 million?”

11 Walter Olson 11.01.11 at 2:01 pm

Thanks everyone for catching the million/billion typo.

12 Bob Lipton 11.02.11 at 6:30 am

That’s a lot of money. However, speaking as someone who invests his own — and his family’s — money in publicly owned corporations, after decades of dealing with a lot of CEOs with their heads-I-win-tails-you-lose attitude, a law that makes them legally responsible for corporate statements is a great idea. What the h*** am I overpaying them for anyway?

Bob

13 Mike 11.02.11 at 10:41 am

Just wondering why 10 people have to comment on the same typo?
This is like 10 people waiting for an elevator and all pushing the button, as if the first guy didnt push it correctly :)

14 Walter Olson 11.02.11 at 10:50 am

It’s not commenters’ fault. Comments are moderated and in this case several hours went by before they could get reviewed, during which time the queued comments were not visible.

15 DensityDuck 11.02.11 at 12:42 pm

I spotted a typo in the article!

It should be $seventy BILLIONS where you say $seventy MILLIONS instead!

thanks glad to help you!!

16 Beagles 11.02.11 at 1:56 pm

I saw 14 comments and thought, oh, maybe an interesting thread. NOT

Comments on this entry are closed.