Last December, we previewed the significant cost accounting and pricing data disclosure changes contained in the Fiscal Year 2026 National Defense Authorization Act (“NDAA”), including Section 1804(c)’s increase to the threshold governing the Truthful Cost or Pricing Data Statute (formerly the Truth in Negotiations Act, and still commonly called “TINA”). That change is no longer on the horizon: it is here. The FY 2026 NDAA was signed into law on December 18, 2025, and the higher TINA threshold has taken effect for contracts entered into after June 30, 2026. This post focuses on what that means, in practical terms, for prime contractors and subcontractors.
Continue Reading The $10 Million TINA Threshold Is Now in Effect: What Contractors and Subcontractors Need to KnowCongress Considers Further FOCI Reforms as DoW Moves to Expand Disclosure Requirements for Unclassified Defense Contractors
The public comment period for the long-awaited Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (“DFARS”) proposed rule, “Mitigating Risks Related to Foreign Ownership, Control, or Influence” (the “proposed DFARS FOCI rule”), closed on July 6, 2026. But recent activity in Congress suggests that the Department of War (“DoW”)’s proposed rule may be only one part of a broader effort to expand the government’s visibility into and mitigation of foreign ownership, control, or influence (“FOCI”) risks across the defense industrial base. Taken together, the proposed DFARS FOCI rule and pending provisions in the House and Senate versions of the Fiscal Year (“FY”) 2027 National Defense Authorization Act (“NDAA”) could substantially extend FOCI-related scrutiny beyond the traditional universe of cleared contractors performing classified work.
Continue Reading Congress Considers Further FOCI Reforms as DoW Moves to Expand Disclosure Requirements for Unclassified Defense ContractorsFY26 NDAA Aims to Raise the Dollar Thresholds for the Applicability of CAS and TINA
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 TINAForging a Modern Strategic Production Base: Senate Proposes Stand-Alone Defense-Production Powers for the Pentagon
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 PentagonSPEEDing up Procurement?: House Armed Services Bill Seeks to Reform Defense Acquisition
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
Reintroduced SHIPS Act Signals Continued Momentum for Domestic Maritime Investment
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