CPAs and Advisors with Your Growth in Mind

ASBCA Holds that Leases are not Necessarily Subject to CAS 404

In Exelis, Inc., ASBCA No. 60131 (29 Aug. 2016), the Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals (“ASBCA”) held that a concern whether a building lease was a capital lease or an operating lease is not subject to Cost Accounting Standards (“CAS”) 404. In 2007, the Defense Contract Audit Agency (“DCAA”) released its audit of Exelis’ 2004 final indirect cost rates. DCAA questioned Exelis’ lease costs, finding that the building lease was a capital lease instead of an operating lease as claimed by Exelis and that Exelis could only include building depreciation in its indirect cost pool rather than the entire. Read More.

Topics: , , , , , , ,

The ASBCA Issues Two CAS Decisions

By: John Ford , Senior Consultant, Government Contractor Services Group Recently, the Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals (“ASBCA” or “the Board”) issued two decisions relating to the Cost Accounting Standards (“CAS”) that should be of interest to contractors. In the first decision, Raytheon Company, Space and Airborne Systems, ASBCA No. 58608 (August 19, 2016), the Board decided that the contracting officer had abused her discretion by failing to consider all the factors listed in Federal Acquisition Regulation (“FAR”) 9903.305 in determining whether increased costs to the government resulting from an accounting practice change were material. As a large contractor doing billions. Read More.

Topics: , , , , ,

DoD Proposes Changes to Cost or Pricing Data Rules for Small Businesses

On August 30, the Department of Defense (“DoD”) issued a proposed rule to implement a section of the National Defense Authorization Act for fiscal year 2016 that provides exceptions from the certified cost and pricing data requirements, and from the records examination requirement for certain awards to small businesses or nontraditional defense contractors. The proposed rule would amend the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (“DFARS”) to provide an exception from cost or pricing data for contracts, subcontracts, or modifications of contracts or subcontracts valued at less than $7.5 million. This exception would be applicable to small businesses or “nontraditional” defense contractors,. Read More.

Topics: , , , , , ,

Improvements to Subcontracting

On July 14, 2016, the Federal Acquisition Regulatory Council published a final rule in Federal Acquisition Circular 2005-89, effective November 16, 2016, intended to improve subcontracting with small business concerns. The new rule implements sections 1321 and 1322 of the Small Business Jobs Act of 2010. Under section 1321, the Federal Acquisition Regulation (“FAR”) was to be amended “to establish a policy on, subcontracting compliance relating to small business concerns.” Thus, the new rule makes many FAR provisions relating to subcontracting with small business concerns. We will not discuss all the changes here, but will highlight those that have a. Read More.

Topics: , , , , ,

Subcontractor Oversight (Who’s Responsible?)

By: John N. Ford, JD ; Senior Consultant  Who has privity? 42.505 – Post-award Subcontractor Conferences (a) The prime contractor is generally responsible for conducting post-award conferences with subcontractors. However, the prime contractor may invite Government representatives to a conference with subcontractors, or the Government may request that the prime contractor initiate a conference with subcontractors. The prime contractor should ensure that representatives from involved contract administration offices are invited. (b) Government representatives– (1) Must recognize the lack of privity of contract between the Government and subcontractors; (2) Shall not take action that is inconsistent with or alters subcontracts; and (3) Shall ensure that. Read More.

Topics: , , , , , ,

Audit Alert Issued for DCMA Implementation Guidance on Blended Compensation Caps

On February 19, 2016, the Defense Contract Audit Agency (“DCAA”) issued Memorandum for Regional Directors (“MRD”) 16-PSP-005(R), Audit Alert on DCMA Implementation Guidance on Blended Compensation Caps. The Alert provides auditors with official guidance when dealing with blended compensation caps with contractors, and in tandem with the Defense Contract Management Agency (“DCMA”). What does this mean? Let’s take a few steps back to October 2014, when Shay Assad, the Director of Defense Pricing Acquisition Technology, and Logistics OUSD (“AT&L”), issued a memo stating that use of a blended rate is deemed “practical and cost efficient.” This was in reaction to. Read More.

Topics: , , , , ,