Redstone Government Consulting Blog | DFARS Business Systems (10)

Supply-Chain Rules from Section 889(a)(1)(A) of the NDAA for 2019 (Implemented by FAR Subpart 4.21)

There have been several recent developments in U.S. law, relating to non-tariff restrictions on foreign-origin information technology and telecommunications equipment, with a focus on Chinese-origin products. This is the second installment of a three-part series on this topic.

Supply-Chain Rules Under DFARS Subpart 239.73

In the ongoing trade war between the U.S. and China, the U.S. Government’s Section 301 tariffs on Chinese-origin goods has received most of the attention, and rightfully so. Effective September 1, 2019, these tariffs generally impact all Chinese-origin goods imported into the United States, including all information technology and telecommunications equipment (“Equipment”). However, there have also been several recent developments in U.S. law, relating to non-tariff restrictions on foreign-origin Equipment, with specific focus on Chinese-origin products.

The Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) implemented Section 822 of the Fiscal Year 2017 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) which requires contactors to submit additional certified cost or pricing data when only one offer is received in response to a competitive solicitation.  Certified cost and pricing data is required when the following three criteria are met:

We get lots of questions about Government property and how it should be handled with subcontractors. Remember, and it has been said over and over, the prime contractor is responsible for just about anything subcontractors do in support of a contract. And yes, that includes Government property requirements.

As a follow-up to our recent blog post, My CPA Audited My Financial Statements. Does That Mean My Accounting System is Adequate?  where we covered some differences between a financial statement audit and an adequate accounting system, we received several great questions from our readers.  We thought it might be beneficial to address them via a new blog post for the benefit of all our readers.  We welcome discussion on our blogs, though we do so in private via email.  In this case, though, these questions are ones we see frequently and impact all companies doing business with the U.S. Government.

Recently, there has been much discussion around comments made by Katie Arrington, the special assistant to the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Acquisition for Cyber in the Office of the Under Secretary of Acquisition and Sustainment in DoD.  She made the following statement before a roomful of vendors at the PSC meeting in Arlington, VA.

We have recently had to deal with issues related to DCAA applying DFARS business system rules in DFARS 252.242-7006 Accounting System Administration in its evaluation of small business client accounting systems. The DFARS business system rules were never intended to be applied to small businesses. Further, the limited resources of a small business make it very difficult for a small business to fully comply with all 18 of the specific criteria contained in the business system rules. DFARS 252.242-7005 regarding the applicability of the business system rules states:

Government furnished property can be a headache, even for the most seasoned contractor. It can include thousands of tiny parts, multi-million-dollar pieces of equipment or both – often all on one contract in an old dark government building. We have identified some common, and not-so-common, areas we see missing in contractor government property management plans.

It has been years since the contract period of performance has ended, DCAA has finally concluded their audit or review of your incurred cost proposal, and you have received the final indirect rate letter from DCAA. Now what? By design, the contract closeout process begins in earnest.   Typically, the Administrative Contracting Officer (ACO) is responsible for initiating administrative closeout of the contract after receiving evidence of its physical completion.

With a Presidential Memorandum halting all proposed federal regulations that have not yet taken effect and pausing the Department of Labor’s (DOL) appeal of the nationwide injunction on the overtime rule which would double the minimum salary for exempt status, we are curious how the new administration will impact employer responsibilities, particularly those of federal contractors. While we certainly hope for some respite, we won’t speculate on what might happen, and we continue to encourage employers to be diligent in compliance with those regulations which have recently taken effect as well as those that employers have been slow to tackle.