UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

FORM SD

SPECIALIZED DISCLOSURE REPORT

DEERE & COMPANY

(Exact name of the registrant as specified in its charter)

Edward R. Berk

Corporate Secretary

(309) 765-8000

(Name and telephone number, including area code, of the

person to contact in connection with this report.)

Check the appropriate box to indicate the rule pursuant to which this Form is being filed, and provide the period to which the information in this Form applies:

Section 1 – Conflict Minerals Disclosure

Deere & Company (the “Company”) and its subsidiaries (collectively, “John Deere”) manufacture and distribute agriculture and turf and construction and forestry equipment and parts. For the period from January 1 to December 31, 2021 (the “Reporting Period”), certain components and parts of John Deere’s products contained columbite-tantalite (coltan) (or its derivative tantalum), gold, wolframite (or its derivative tungsten), and/or cassiterite (or its derivative tin) (collectively, “conflict minerals”) necessary to the production or functionality of such equipment. The Company has conducted in good faith a reasonable country of origin inquiry that is reasonably designed to determine whether any of the conflict minerals originated in the Democratic Republic of the Congo or an adjoining country (“Covered Countries”) or are from recycled or scrap sources.

The Company’s Conflict Minerals Report for the Reporting Period is filed as Exhibit 1.01 hereto and can be found on its website at http://www.investor.deere.com/governance. Information contained on the Company’s website is not part of, nor incorporated by reference into, this Form SD or the Conflict Minerals Report.

The Company has filed, as Exhibit 1.01 to this Specialized Disclosure Report on Form SD, a Conflict Minerals Report.

Section 2 – Exhibits

List below the following exhibit filed as part of this report.

SIGNATURES

Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this Report to be signed on its behalf by the duly authorized undersigned.

Exhibit 1.01

Conflict Minerals Report

May 23, 2022

Introduction

This Conflict Minerals Report is presented to comply with Securities and Exchange Commission Rule 13p-1 under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“SEC Rule”). Deere & Company (“Company”) and its subsidiaries (collectively, “John Deere”) manufacture and distribute agriculture and turf and construction and forestry equipment and parts. For the period from January 1 to December 31, 2021 (“Reporting Period”), certain components and parts of John Deere’s equipment products contained columbite-tantalite (coltan) (or its derivative tantalum), gold, wolframite (or its derivative tungsten), and/or cassiterite (or its derivative tin) (collectively, “conflict minerals”) necessary to the production or functionality of such equipment. As part of its efforts, the Company has adopted a policy (“Conflict Minerals Policy”) providing a common set of principles for the sourcing of conflict minerals. In accordance with the SEC Rule, the Company implemented a Reasonable Country of Origin Inquiry (“RCOI”) to determine whether any conflict minerals necessary to the production or functionality of its products (“In-Scope Components”) have originated in the Democratic Republic of the Congo or an adjoining country (“Covered Countries”) or have not come from recycled or scrap sources. Based on the RCOI, the Company believes that certain of the conflict minerals necessary to the production or functionality of its equipment manufactured in the Reporting Period may have originated in the Covered Countries and may not be from recycled or scrap sources (the “Covered Minerals”).

As described in Part I below, the Company conducted an RCOI, which includes the Company’s Conflict Minerals Policy, initial component assessment and identification of suppliers providing In-Scope Components. The supplier survey used the conflict minerals reporting template (CMRT) which is the current industry standard for collecting conflict minerals RCOI data from upstream companies. Smelter data along with supplier responses indicated the need to execute due diligence as outlined in the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development Due Diligence Guidance for Responsible Supply Chains of Minerals from Conflict-Affected and High-Risk Areas (“OECD Guidelines”).

The Company’s due diligence procedures conform, in all material respects, with the framework set forth in the OECD Guidelines and the related supplements for gold and for tin, tantalum and tungsten. In accordance with the SEC Rule and the OECD Guidelines, this Conflict Minerals Report is available on the Company’s website at http://www.investor.deere.com/governance. The Company’s Conflict Minerals Policy is available on its website at http://www.investor.deere.com/governance. Information contained on the Company’s website or otherwise actively linked to this Conflict Minerals Report is not part of, nor incorporated by reference into, this Conflict Minerals Report or the Company’s Form SD.

Part I of this report also describes the due diligence procedures performed by the Company on the source and chain of custody of In-Scope Components for the Reporting Period. Part II of this report describes the Company’s products that contain In-Scope Components, the facilities used to process the Covered Minerals in those In-Scope Components if known to the Company, the country of origin of the Covered Minerals in those In-Scope Components if known to the Company, and the efforts to determine the mine or location of origin with the greatest possible specificity.

Certain components and parts of John Deere’s equipment manufactured during the Reporting Period contain In-Scope Components. The Company’s due diligence procedures are implemented and maintained throughout its supply chain. In accordance with the Company’s Conflict Minerals Policy, the SEC Rule and the OECD Guidelines, the Company has established a due diligence process with the following key components: (1) internal supply management systems and controls; (2) identification and assessment of conflict minerals risk in the supply chain; (3) strategies to address identified risks within the supply chain; and (4) independent audit procedures as required by the SEC Rule. The Company performs due diligence procedures described below on its In-Scope Components.

The Company’s Conflict Minerals Policy establishes the principles regarding the responsible sourcing of conflict minerals against which the Company can assess itself and its suppliers. To enforce the Conflict Minerals Policy, the Company has put in place internal supply management systems and controls. The Company’s management structure consists of three levels of oversight. In accordance with the OECD Guidelines, at the top of the management structure is an executive sponsor. The executive sponsor is a member of the Company’s senior management team. The second level of management is a steering committee comprised of executive-level officers and managers from supply management, environmental, energy and product sustainability, electronic solutions, and legal. This committee provided guidance and oversight to the third level of the management system for conflict minerals. The third level of the management system is a team of subject matter experts (“CM Team”) from relevant functions within the Company, including supply management, environmental, quality, information technology, internal audit, and legal. The CM Team is responsible for implementing the Company’s due diligence procedures. In accordance with the Company’s Conflict Minerals Policy and the OECD Guidelines, the Company will maintain, and will require In-Scope Suppliers (as defined below) to maintain, conflict minerals records for five years.

Due to the size and complexity of John Deere’s global supply chain as well as its considerable number of suppliers, products, parts and components, a process was developed to assess and remove parts not containing conflict minerals from the inquiry. The RCOI pertains only to suppliers with In-Scope Components (“In-Scope Suppliers”) introduced into John Deere’s supply chain during the Reporting Period. Parts, components, or products not containing conflict minerals were excluded from further inquiry.

The Company’s RCOI is comprised of three processes: the first collects information on the Company’s equipment components (“Equipment Survey”); the second collects information on the Company’s electronics components (“Electronics Survey”); and the third collects information on the Company’s after-market parts division (“All-Makes Survey” and, collectively with the Equipment Survey and the Electronics Survey, the “Surveys”). In each case, the survey covers In-Scope Suppliers of In-Scope Components during the Reporting Period.

The Equipment Survey randomly selected In-Scope Suppliers based on volume of In-Scope Components provided to the Company during the Reporting Period. These suppliers were ranked based on the total volume of In-Scope Components supplied or forecasted to be supplied to the Company for the Reporting Period. The In-Scope Suppliers were then separated into groups according to volume of parts supplied to the Company: high volume (supplying 80 percent of In-Scope Components), mid-volume (supplying 15 percent of In-Scope Components), and low volume (supplying 5 percent of In-Scope Components). The In-Scope Suppliers were then randomly selected from these groups such that the survey covered a minimum of 80 percent of volume from the high-volume group, 18 percent of volume from the mid-volume group and 2 percent of volume from the low-volume group. The All-Makes Survey followed a similar selection process to the Equipment Survey.

The Electronic Survey randomly selected In-Scope Suppliers based on volume of In-Scope Components provided to the Company during the Reporting Period. These suppliers were ranked based on the total volume of In-Scope Components supplied to the Company for the Reporting Period. The In-Scope Suppliers were then separated into groups according to volume of parts supplied to the Company: high- volume (supplying 98 percent of In-Scope Components) and low-volume (supplying 2 percent of In-Scope Components). The In-Scope Suppliers were then randomly selected from these groups such that the survey covered 100 percent of volume from the high-volume group and 15 percent of suppliers from the low-volume group. The selection process for the Electronic Survey accounts for the greater predominance of In-Scope Components in electronic components.

The Company collected conflict minerals data from the identified In-Scope Suppliers for each unique part supplied to the Company during the Reporting Period. Each In-Scope Supplier surveyed was required to make part-specific or company specific declarations to the Company. The Surveys used the standard industry reporting template, the Conflict Minerals Reporting Template (“CMRT”), published by the Responsible Minerals Initiative (“RMI”) (formerly Conflict-Free Sourcing Initiative), to review conflict minerals risk within the supply chain and identify smelters of origin. The Company used its proprietary software system to conduct the Equipment Survey. The system enabled the Company to communicate with In-Scope Suppliers, to make an initial risk assessment, and to assist In-Scope Suppliers in completing the CMRT accurately. The Company used other tools and resources to conduct the Electronic Survey and All-Makes Survey in a manner aligned with the approach of the Equipment Survey.

In all cases, In-Scope Suppliers were asked to complete the survey within eight weeks after receipt of the request. Additionally, In-Scope Suppliers were required to automatically update their responses with a new CMRT should an In-Scope Component that is the subject of a CMRT change during the Reporting Period. In accordance with the OECD Guidelines, the Company relies on third party audits by the Responsible Minerals Assurance Process (“RMAP”) (formerly the Conflict-Free Smelter Program) to validate the conflict free status of mineral smelters. The Company relies on the list of third party compliant RMAP smelters to determine the conflict status of the smelters identified in the supplier CMRT responses.

The Equipment Survey yielded complete CMRTs from approximately 77 percent of the In-Scope Suppliers surveyed, representing approximately 90 percent of the In-Scope Component volume from those suppliers. The Electronics Survey received complete CMRTs from approximately 93 percent of the

In-Scope Suppliers surveyed, representing approximately 98 percent of the In-Scope Component volume from the In-Scope Components of those suppliers. The All-Makes Survey received complete CMRTs from approximately 58 percent of the In-Scope Suppliers surveyed, representing approximately 91 percent of the In-Scope Component volume from these suppliers. On a combined basis, the Company received complete CMRTs from approximately 79 percent of its In-Scope Suppliers surveyed, representing approximately 92 percent of the Company’s In-Scope Component volume from these suppliers.

The CM Team evaluated the CMRTs and assessed a risk level for each In-Scope Supplier response. The risk evaluation was based on the risks outlined in the OECD Guidelines. Based on the risk evaluation, the CM Team determined whether further due diligence was required on any In-Scope Supplier. The CM Team contacted certain In-Scope Suppliers to verify the information provided on the CMRT.

The Company is a member of RMI and supports its effort to ensure smelters are compliant as conflict-free, including the RMAP that identifies smelters and refiners having systems in place to assure sourcing of conflict free materials. The Company intends to continue its due diligence efforts on its conflict minerals supply chain. The Company’s due diligence procedures will continue to develop by engaging In-Scope Suppliers to improve transparency throughout the supply chain. In accordance with the Company’s Conflict Minerals Policy, it will continue incorporating conflict minerals obligations into its supplier contracts. The Company continued to incorporate the Conflict Minerals Supplier Response into the supplier evaluation process. The Company’s due diligence procedures also support the continuing enforcement of its Conflict Minerals Policy and its Supplier Code of Conduct.

The Company’s equipment operations include three business segments. The production and precision agriculture segment defines, develops, and delivers global equipment and technology solutions to unlock customer value for production-scale growers of large grains, small grains, cotton, and sugar. The segment’s main products include large and certain mid-size tractors, combines, cotton pickers, sugarcane harvesters and loaders, and soil preparation, seeding, application and crop care equipment. The small agriculture and turf segment defines, develops, and delivers global equipment and technology solutions to unlock customer value for dairy and livestock producers, high-value crop producers, and turf and utility customers. The segment’s primary products include certain mid-size and small tractors, as well as hay and forage equipment, riding and commercial lawn equipment, golf course equipment, and utility vehicles. The construction and forestry segment defines, develops, and delivers a broad range of machines and technology solutions organized along earthmoving, forestry and roadbuilding production systems. The segment’s primary products include crawler dozers and loaders, four-wheel-drive loaders, excavators, skid-steer loaders, milling machines, and log harvesters.

As a result of the due diligence procedures described in Part I above, the Company believes the equipment products described above contain In-Scope Components.

Attached hereto as Schedule A is a list of the facilities that, based on the due diligence process described above, are known to the Company and that the Company believes processed the Covered Minerals in the Company’s products during the Reporting Period. During the due diligence process described above, the In-Scope Suppliers identified many entities that the Company could not validate as smelters or refiners and therefore are not listed in Schedule A. A significant number of smelters that may or may not have processed the Covered Minerals in the Company’s products have not participated in the RMAP and, therefore, have not yet established their conflict status.

As a result of the due diligence procedures described in Part I above, the Company does not have sufficient information to determine conclusively the countries of origin of all Covered Minerals.

As discussed above in Part I, the Company relies on third parties to validate the conflict status of smelter sources. The Company’s due diligence procedures are designed to identify risks within the supply chain. During the due diligence process described above, the In-Scope Suppliers identified the Covered Minerals processed by RMAP smelters may be from the countries of origin listed on Schedule B attached hereto.

Schedule A

Facilities Known to process Covered Minerals during the Reporting Period

Schedule B

Countries of Origin

Andorra

Australia

Austria

Belgium

Bolivia

Brazil

Canada

Chile

China

Colombia

Czech Republic

Estonia

France

Germany

Ghana

Hong Kong

India

Indonesia

Italy

Japan

Kazakhstan

Korea, Republic of

Kyrgyzstan

Lithuania

Malaysia

Mauritania

Mexico

Myanmar

Netherlands

New Zealand

Norway

Peru

Philippines

Poland

Republic of North Macedonia

Russian Federation

Rwanda

Saudi Arabia

Singapore

South Africa

Spain

Sudan

Sweden

Switzerland

Taiwan

Thailand

Turkey

Uganda

United Arab Emirates

United States

Unknown

Uzbekistan

Vietnam

Zambia

Zimbabwe