Legislation

Among the most challenging areas of regulatory compliance for federal contractors are cost accounting and cost and pricing data disclosure requirements.  Indeed, many companies place guardrails on the nature and scale of their business relationships with the U.S. government precisely to avoid the application of these requirements.  In a move that seems consistent with the federal government’s push towards expanding the defense industrial base and working with more commercial companies, Congress recently released the final negotiated language of the FY 2026 National Defense Authorization Act (“NDAA”).  The draft text, currently awaiting a full Senate vote, contains impactful changes to reduce the applicability of federal Cost Accounting Standards (“CAS”) and the Truthful Cost or Pricing Data Statute (formerly the Truth in Negotiations Act, commonly referred to as “TINA”). Continue Reading FY26 NDAA Aims to Raise the Dollar Thresholds for the Applicability of CAS and TINA

The Defense Production Act (DPA) has long been viewed as the primary federal mechanism for managing and supporting defense production.  Since it was enacted in September 1950—just months after the Korean War began—the DPA has armed the President with wartime-style powers to prioritize contracts, allocate scarce materials, and finance surge defense production capacity.  These DPA industrial authorities are subject to periodic reauthorization, with the current sunset set for September 30, 2025.  While the reauthorization of the DPA remains pending, the Senate Armed Services Committee (SASC) has advanced a new NDAA provision that would convert the extant Industrial Base Fund (IBF) (10 U.S.C. section 4817) into a Pentagon-controlled toolkit that closely mirrors—but is not identical to—DPA’s Title III authorities.  The introduction of section 849A of the FY 2026 NDAA suggests that the SASC is no longer willing to entrust the re-armament of the Pentagon and revitalization of the Defense Industrial Base (DIB) solely to reauthorization of the DPA—a process that lives or dies in other committees’ jurisdictions. Continue Reading Forging a Modern Strategic Production Base:  Senate Proposes Stand-Alone Defense-Production Powers for the Pentagon

The Trump Administration continues to focus on procurement reform aimed at increasing acquisition efficiency, including through the “Revolutionary FAR Overhaul” and reinforced preference for commercial products. Now, with the House Armed Services Committee (HASC) introducing a defense procurement reform bill, it is clear that HASC leadership is also targeting increased efficiency as a key goal of the Fiscal Year 2026 National Defense Authorization Act (FY26 NDAA). We cover the bill’s key proposals and their potential impact on defense contractors below.Continue Reading SPEEDing up Procurement?: House Armed Services Bill Seeks to Reform Defense Acquisition

On April 20th, a bipartisan, bicameral group of lawmakers, including Senator Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.) and Senator Todd Young (R-Ind.) in the Senate and Representative John Garamendi (D-Calif.) and Representative Trent Kelly (R-Miss.) in the House, reintroduced the Shipbuilding and Harbor Infrastructure for Prosperity and Security for America Act of 2025 (the “SHIPS Act” or the “Act”). The SHIPS Act’s sponsors describe the bill as a “comprehensive approach to revitalizing the U.S. Merchant Marine.” It aims to: (1) establish national oversight and consistent funding for U.S. maritime policy; (2) make U.S.-flagged vessels more commercially competitive through de-regulation; (3) rebuild the U.S. shipyard industrial base; and (4) expand and strengthen the maritime labor force. It also sets a goal for establishing a fleet of 250 U.S.-flagged vessels in international commerce.Continue Reading Reintroduced SHIPS Act Signals Continued Momentum for Domestic Maritime Investment