Exhibit 1.01

TE Connectivity plc
Conflict Minerals Report

For The Calendar-Year Reporting Period Ended December 31, 2024

1. OVERVIEW OF TE’S CONFLICT MINERALS PROGRAM

This Conflict Minerals Report (Report) has been prepared by TE Connectivity plc (herein referred to as TE, the Company, we, us, or our) pursuant to Rule 13p-1 (the Rule) promulgated under Section 13(p) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (Exchange Act). The Rule imposes certain reporting obligations on those Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) registrants, like TE, whose manufactured products contain conflict minerals that are necessary to the functionality or production of their products. The term “conflict minerals” is defined to mean cassiterite, columbite-tantalite (coltan), gold, wolframite, and their derivatives, which are limited to tin, tantalum, and tungsten (together, 3TG). The term “Covered Countries” for purposes of Section 13(p) and the SEC rules thereunder, as well as this report and the accompanying Form SD, are the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), and the adjoining countries of the Republic of the Congo, the Central African Republic, South Sudan, Uganda, Rwanda, Burundi, Tanzania, Zambia and Angola.

In 2024, we designed and manufactured products to connect power, data, and signal in a broad array of industries, including automotive, energy, industrial, data communications, appliances, medical, and aerospace and defense. Our principal product families included terminals and connector systems and components, sensors, interventional medical components, relays, heat shrink tubing, wire and cable, application tooling, and antennas.

For the 2024 reporting period, our reasonable country of origin inquiry (RCOI) survey process targeted a refined list of products deemed in scope for having any quantity of tin, tantalum, tungsten or gold that is “necessary to the functionality or production” of these products within the meaning of Section 13(p) and the SEC’s Rule and Form SD thereunder (necessary conflict minerals). We continue to refine our survey process as part of our continuous improvement efforts to bring the TE Conflict Minerals Program (Program) into greater alignment with the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) Due Diligence Guidance for Responsible Supply Chains of Minerals from Conflict-Affected and High-Risk Areas, Third Edition, and the supplements thereto relating to tin, tantalum, tungsten and gold (OECD Due Diligence Guidance). The OECD Due Diligence Guidance has been identified by the SEC as an appropriate internationally recognized framework for conducting the RCOI and due diligence relating to necessary conflict minerals pursuant to Section 13(p), the Rule and Form SD. TE supplier information is gathered by a third-party compliance information service (TPCS) provided by a leading software-as-a-service solution.

While TE has been a member of the Responsible Minerals Initiative (RMI) for several years, TE joined the Responsible Business Alliance (RBA) as an affiliate member in June 2024 to further our commitment to social, ethical and environmental sustainability and to promote responsible and sustainable business practices throughout our global supply chain. TE actively contributes to several RMI sub-committees or working groups to help advance responsible sourcing practices.

2. COMPANY MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS

In alignment with Step 1 of the OECD Due Diligence Guidance, TE has established policies, a management structure and controls to support supply chain due diligence related to 3TG.

Policy and Procedures

Our Program is governed by the following policy and procedures:

Internal Management Structure

TE has established a multi-level governance structure to manage compliance with our Policy. Our management structure includes:

Control Systems

Maintain Records

Program data is stored in accordance with our corporate records retention schedule to ensure that relevant information is preserved for appropriate periods.

Supplier Engagement

We have adopted a number of supplier outreach tools, including but not limited to training and program materials, designed to encourage suppliers to develop their own conflict minerals due diligence programs in accordance with the SEC’s conflict minerals regulatory requirements. We also direct suppliers to informational resources related to conflict minerals provided by our TPCS. We further include our Policy on our TE Supplier Portal and as part of our supplier onboarding process.

Grievance Mechanism

TE’s Office of the Ombudsman acts as an independent, impartial and confidential resource with whom employees, suppliers, investors, customers and other third parties can ask questions or raise concerns about potential violations of applicable laws, regulations, the Guide, TE policies and procedures, and TE’s Core Values. The Ombudsman reports directly to the Audit Committee of the TE Board of Directors and ensures that all reported issues are investigated, communicated to all affected stakeholders and resolved in an appropriate manner. Often, the post-investigation corrective actions enable TE to make process improvements or otherwise rectify an inefficiency for the benefit of TE or its employees.

The Office of the Ombudsman services all TE entities globally. Therefore, all TE employees or third parties are encouraged to use this service to report any actual or potential breaches or concerns of human rights obligations. Information about the program is publicly available on the TE website at https://www.te.com/en/about-te/corporate-responsibility/governance/ombudsman.html.

3. IDENTIFY AND ASSESS RISKS IN THE SUPPLY CHAIN

Due Diligence Performed

In alignment with Step 2 of the OECD Due Diligence Guidance as applicable to downstream companies, our due diligence measures as outlined below have been designed to identify and assess risks in our supply chain.

Supply Chain — Reasonable Country of Origin Inquiry (RCOI)

The products that we manufacture are complex, and we utilize thousands of components from many direct suppliers. We have relationships with a vast network of suppliers throughout the world and there are generally multiple tiers between the 3TG mines, SORs, and our direct suppliers. Therefore, we must rely on our direct suppliers to work with their upstream suppliers (suppliers that are closer to the SORs than TE in the supply chain) to provide us with accurate information about the origin of 3TG in the components and raw materials that we purchase. We work to implement contracts with those direct suppliers to impose contract terms that compel these suppliers to support our due diligence efforts with respect to 3TG content.

Because of the complexity and size of our supply chain, we developed a risk-based approach to structure the scope of our RCOI survey and due diligence process to determine whether we had any necessary 3TG in our supply chain. We then surveyed those direct suppliers of the Covered Products (defined below).

Description of Products Containing “Necessary” Conflict Minerals

Each year TE’s raw material and commodity code groupings are reviewed for the presence of potential 3TG. Once those products and materials are identified, internal subject matter experts and engineers analyze whether the 3TG in the products and materials are “necessary to the functionality or production” of such products within the meaning of the SEC’s rules. The result of that analysis leads to the identification of in-scope supplier products potentially at risk of containing one or more necessary conflict minerals (the “Covered Products”).

Efforts to Determine Mine or Location of Origin

We have taken reasonable efforts to determine the mines or locations of countries of origin of necessary 3TG in our supply chain by relying on the CMRT’s provided by the identified suppliers together with resources offered by our TPCS and the RMI. As a result of our membership in the RMI (whose efforts focus on the location and the commitment of smelters and refiners to go through its RMAP or participate in a recognized auditing program), our understanding of the OECD Due Diligence Guidance, benchmarking with other companies, and consultations with compliance and sustainability leaders in companies similarly situated to TE, we believe we are making good efforts. TE relies on the RMI and our participation in the RMI’s Mineral Reporting Template (MRT) working group to help keep us abreast of developments in conflict minerals sourcing, refinement of the CMRT form, and process improvements and informal benchmarking opportunities with other members.

Smelters or Refiners and Country of Origin of 3TG

We attach a listing of those SORs reported as providing 3TG for Covered Products in 2024 through TE’s supplier responses to the CMRT and upon further review and due diligence of such responses (Exhibit A). Regarding country of origin, TE relies on third-party assessments and information available from such sources as our TPCS, RMI’s RMAP and RCOI reports, the London Bullion Market Association (LBMA), as well as our assessment of our supplier responses, and concluded that TE, at this time, does not have sufficient information to determine the countries of origin of the 3TG for every TE product.

Survey Responses for TE Products

Our 2024 supplier survey campaign requested that the identified suppliers provide information to us regarding 3TG and SORs using the CMRT. We received a supplier response rate of 80.1% of the Covered Products surveyed. Based on information provided through the CMRT data collection process and from supplier outreach, a majority of our supplier responses are company-level data, which cannot directly be linked to products sold by TE. As in past years, some supplier responses continued to note that the source of the conflict minerals could not be ascertained.

We validated and categorized the supplier responses by risk factors, as described below, to determine which suppliers required further assessment. As in past years, the review criteria included assessing incomplete responses as well as inconsistencies within the data reported by those suppliers. As part of our supplier outreach, we have engaged directly with suppliers in an effort to secure improved responses.

To determine the risk, each facility that meets the definition of a SOR of a 3TG mineral is assessed according to “SORs of Interest” indicators defined in the OECD Due Diligence Guidance. Our TPCS uses numerous factors to determine the level of risk that each smelter poses to the supply chain by identifying “SORs of Interest” including:

From the responses received, the following statistics were compiled:

4. DESIGN AND IMPLEMENT A STRATEGY TO RESPOND TO RISKS

We continue engaging with suppliers, encourage them to provide part-level data, and direct them to remediate sanctioned smelters to better align with our reporting practices and to enhance transparency. We are guided by inputs and direction from industry leading sources and continue to develop our response and remediation measures to remediate the high-risk smelters in our supply chain over time.

In alignment with Step 3 of the OECD Due Diligence Guidance, we have designed and implemented a strategy to manage risks as follows:

5. CARRY OUT INDEPENDENT THIRD-PARTY AUDIT OF SUPPLY CHAIN DUE DILIGENCE AT IDENTIFIED POINTS IN THE SUPPLY CHAIN

We do not have a direct relationship with 3TG SORs and therefore do not perform or direct audits of these entities. However, in alignment with Step 4 of the OECD Due Diligence Guidance, we support SOR audits conducted by independent third parties through our RMI membership and have obtained the RMI list of “RMAP Conformant” smelters and refiners. As outlined in our Policy, we also expect our suppliers to source from conformant or active SORs that have been validated through third party accredited audits such as RMAP, LBMA or other recognized auditing schemes. We continue to examine how best to improve our upstream diligence efforts, possibly in tandem with our third-party conducted supplier social responsibility audits and human rights/modern slavery due diligence.

6. REPORT ON SUPPLY CHAIN DUE DILIGENCE

Consistent with Step 5 of the OECD Due Diligence Guidance, this Conflict Minerals Report constitutes our annual report on our 3TG due diligence and is publicly available on our website, along with the accompanying Form SD, at http://investors.te.com/financial-reports/sec-filings/default.aspx as well as our Conflict Minerals website at https://www.te.com/en/utilities/product-compliance/conflict-minerals.html. In addition, this Report and the accompanying Form SD have been filed with the SEC and are publicly available on the SEC’s website at https://www.sec.gov.

Results of Due Diligence

Based on our due diligence, we have successfully remediated 22.2% of the high-risk parts that included 3TG from our supply chain, and we continue to work with suppliers to remediate.

In previous years, out of an abundance of caution, we retained all smelters reported on our corporate smelter list. Part of our methodology was to include closed entities to ensure any potential parts remaining in the supply chain were not excluded. Beginning this year, we reduced our lookback period to 1.5 years after closure. We leverage RMI data in our due diligence efforts to analyze the SOR’s to identify whether the SOR’s are in our supply chain. Based on this due diligence, we also were able to remove 158 entities from our supply chain that are not valid smelters or the entity is not operational as either temporarily or permanently closed. This change allows us to focus on relevant entities.

Notwithstanding continued improvements made to our RCOI and due diligence processes, we are unable to determine with absolute assurance, the origin of all the necessary conflict minerals in our products for the 2024 reporting period (January 1 through December 31, 2024), and therefore cannot exclude the possibility that some of these minerals may have originated in one or more of the Covered Countries and are not derived from recycled or scrap sources.

Steps to be Taken in 2025 to Mitigate Risk and Continuous Improvement

We intend to take the following steps as continuous improvement measures to improve our due diligence to be conducted in 2025, to further mitigate the risk that any necessary 3TG in our products finance or benefit armed groups in any of the Covered Countries:

Cautions Concerning Website Information and Forward-Looking Statements

Other than any documents expressly incorporated by reference in this Conflict Minerals Report and/or the accompanying Form SD, the information on any of our websites referred to in this report is not part of this report or any other document filed with the SEC, including but not limited to the accompanying Form SD.

Certain statements in this report may be “forward-looking” within the meaning of the U.S. Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Words such as “expects,” “intends,” “plans,” “projects,” “believes,” “estimates,” “targets,” “anticipates,” and similar expressions are used to identify these forward-looking statements. Examples of forward-looking statements include statements addressing our future financial condition and operating results, other information relating to our future plans, and any other statement that does not directly relate to any historical or current fact. Forward-looking statements are based on our current expectations and assumptions, which may not prove to be accurate. These statements are not guarantees and are subject to risks, uncertainties and changes in circumstances that are difficult to predict. Actual outcomes and results may differ materially from those anticipated in any of our forward-looking statements. Risks that may cause these forward-looking statements to be inaccurate include: failure to carry out these plans in a timely manner or at all; lack of cooperation or progress by our suppliers, and their respective suppliers and smelters; lack of progress by smelter programs for conflict minerals (including the possibility of inaccurate information, fraud and other irregularities) or that these plans may not be effective. In addition, you should also consider the important factors described in reports and documents that we file from time to time with the SEC, including the factors described under the section titled “Risk Factors” in the Company’s most recently filed Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q or Annual Report on Form 10-K. As a result, these statements speak only as of the date they are made and we undertake no obligation to update or revise any forward-looking statement, except as required by federal securities laws.

Exhibit A – Smelters reported which, to the extent known, may have processed necessary conflict minerals in TE products based on CMRT responses received from our suppliers for Calendar 2024 Reporting Period.