Redstone Government Consulting Blog | Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) (12)

The topic of accounting system adequacy seems to be a recurring issue for many in the government contracting community.  Earlier this month in the ongoing “process of elimination”, GAO weighed in again on what is NOT considered a determination of accounting system adequacy.  In Shivoy B-413104.36, GAO rightfully denied a protest for unequal treatment in eliminating a proposed offeror due to lack of verification of a proposed subcontractor’s accounting system as adequate.

We have received a number of inquiries from clients related to cost allowability for Employee Stock Ownership Plans (ESOPs). In this Part II, we focus on the cost allowability rules and regulations for government contractors (Part I provided a more general description of ESOPs).

Many small and medium sized companies wonder if having an Employee Stock Ownership Plan (ESOP) is right for their company’s compensation and ownership structure.  Studies show that employee-owned companies benefit from higher worker productivity and certain tax advantages which ultimately result in improved cash flow.  These and other potential advantages could apply to government contractors; however, if you are considering implementing an ESOP, consider engaging someone (or an entity) familiar with ESOPs, as well as someone familiar with the cost allowability (regulations) and DCAA interpretations.

Whether you are new to government contracting or have been “in the game” forever, it’s not unusual for employees to get caught up in the events of the day and overlook the importance of obtaining and maintaining adequate supporting documentation in the support of pricing proposals (pre-contract award) and actual costs – both direct and indirect (post-contract award).  In a perfect world, employees are properly trained on adequate supporting documentation and documenting the appropriate files accordingly. But we aren’t living in a perfect world, and we even debate over what adequate supporting documentation entails.

On April 12, 2016, the Department of Justice (DOJ) and the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) issued a joint statement explaining their standard of review under the antitrust statutes of proposed transactions (mergers, teaming agreements, and other joint business arrangements) acquisitions, within the defense industry. The DOJ and FTC are responsible for reviewing mergers in the defense industry under Section 7 of the Clayton Act, which prohibits mergers whose effect “may be substantially to lessen competition, or to tend to create a monopoly.”

Just a follow-up to our July 13, 2015 blog and a reminder that effective October 1, 2015 a number of FAR dollar-thresholds will be updated in accordance with 41 U.S.C. Section 1908, which requires the inflation adjustment of dollar thresholds every five years. The upcoming changes were posted in July within Federal Register Vol. 80 No. 127; however, the impact of these changes is minimal with most commonly used dollar thresholds being increased around 6-7%. A detailed list of the most frequently used thresholds and their changes are noted below.