We don't have a problem with any aspect of the code that suggests that whatsoever.
We charge a compliance fee for manufacturers if they fail to deliver to our stores the products they had agreed to deliver. The way to think about that is that we will develop an ad, a promotion. Let's say we're going to put an item on for a 30% discount. We agree with the manufacturer that they will provide the forecasted number of products for that ad.
If they are unable to deliver that quantity, which we are planning for to benefit customers, then there's a compliance charge for that failure to deliver.
If we take away the ability to hold that vendor accountable, then what we're concerned about is that the manufacturer will not give us 100% of the committed order. As a result, we will disappoint the customer because we won't have enough product for them in the store in that given week at that price, and the next time we won't be able to put it on at such an aggressive price because we will be afraid of running out.
That's another very tangible example of how the principle of the code is fine, but the way it's drafted we have concerns about.