Over the last month, we have issued multiple client alerts outlining developments related to the Chinese military company covered lobbyist prohibition enacted by Section 851 of the National Defense Authorization Act (“NDAA”) for Fiscal Year (“FY”) 2025, codified at 10 U.S.C. § 4663. This is a follow-up to
Continue Reading Defense Department Publishes Guidance Page Concerning Restrictions on Defense Contractors Retaining Outside ConsultantsRegulations Issued for New Restrictions on Defense Contractors Retaining Outside Consultants
The Chinese military company covered lobbyist prohibition enacted by Section 851 of the National Defense Authorization Act (“NDAA”) for Fiscal Year (“FY”) 2025, codified at 10 U.S.C. § 4663, took effect on June 30, 2026. Just before that date, the Department of Defense took steps to implement the
Continue Reading Regulations Issued for New Restrictions on Defense Contractors Retaining Outside ConsultantsNew Restrictions on Defense Contractors Retaining Outside Consultants Set to Take Effect
In January 2025, Covington issued a client alert noting that the National Defense Authorization Act (“NDAA”) for Fiscal Year (“FY”) 2025, which sets annual spending and policy for the Pentagon, introduced new China-related prohibitions on defense contractors and their consultants. The provision is finally set to take effect on
Continue Reading New Restrictions on Defense Contractors Retaining Outside Consultants Set to Take EffectGAO Scrutinizes DoD Civilian Workforce Cuts: What the Report Means for Federal Contractors
The Government Accountability Office recently issued a report on the Department of Defense’s civilian workforce reductions. It offers a concrete record of how DoD has reduced staffing, where those reductions have occurred, and how the Department has assessed their effects. GAO’s report matters not only as a workforce-management review, but also as a practical resource for companies that depend on DoD procurement, oversight, audit, logistics, finance, and program-management functions. For defense contractors, the report suggests that delays, capacity constraints, and operational friction may persist—and that these issues are likely to receive increased congressional and internal DoD attention.
Continue Reading GAO Scrutinizes DoD Civilian Workforce Cuts: What the Report Means for Federal ContractorsProposed Rule Would Fundamentally Impact Federal Grant and Financial Assistance Framework
On May 29, 2026, the Office of Management and Budget (“OMB”), together with several other federal agencies, published a proposed rule that would fundamentally change many aspects of the regulations in 2 CFR Part 200 governing federal financial assistance awards, including grants, cooperative agreements, loans, and loan guarantees. The comment period will be underway until July 13.
The 412 page proposed rule states that it is aimed at increasing transparency, accountability, and oversight in federal financial assistance. It provides examples of “the types of wasteful spending” that it is meant to target, including recipients “potentially misus[ing] funds to provide services for illegal immigrants.”
While the proposed rule contains numerous changes, this post highlights some of the most notable.
Continue Reading Proposed Rule Would Fundamentally Impact Federal Grant and Financial Assistance FrameworkThe New Executive Order on “Promoting Efficiency, Accountability, and Performance in Federal Contracting”: What Federal Contractors Need to Know
On April 30, 2026, President Trump issued an Executive Order (EO) titled, “Promoting Efficiency, Accountability, and Performance in Federal Contracting.” This EO directs agencies to make fixed-price contracts the default form of contracting, and requires agency officials to execute written justifications to use other forms of contracting. Of particular note for large contractors, the EO directs that, “[w]ithin 90 days of the date of this order, each agency head shall review and, to the maximum extent practicable and consistent with law, seek to modify, restructure, or renegotiate its 10 largest non-fixed-price contracts by dollar value . . . to facilitate use of fixed prices and performance-based incentives for contract deliverables to the maximum extent practicable.”
Continue Reading The New Executive Order on “Promoting Efficiency, Accountability, and Performance in Federal Contracting”: What Federal Contractors Need to KnowOMB Rescinds the “Common Form” Secure Software Attestation Requirement
On January 23, 2026, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) issued Memorandum M-26-05 “Adopting a Risk-based Approach to Software and Hardware Security,” which rescinds a previous Biden Administration’s requirement for all federal agencies to obtain a self-attestation from software producers in the “Common Form” developed by the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) before using certain third-party software. As its rationale, OMB noted that the prior memoranda diverted agencies from developing tailored assurance requirements and failed to account for threats posed by insecure hardware. Memorandum M-26-05 signals that the federal government is moving away from a “one-size fits-all” approach to software security and will instead allow each agency to develop tailored requirements. In creating their own assurance requirements, agencies may still require a self-attestation and/or Software Bill of Materials (SBOM) from the software vendor if the agency determines that such assurances are necessary based on the risks involved and the agency’s needs.
Continue Reading OMB Rescinds the “Common Form” Secure Software Attestation RequirementFrom DAS to WAS: Secretary Hegseth’s Acquisition Overhaul and What It Means for Industry
On November 7, 2025, Secretary of War Pete Hegseth used a speech at the National War College to unveil a Department of War (“DoW”) memorandum titled “Transforming the Defense Acquisition System into the Warfighting Acquisition System to Accelerate Fielding of Urgently Needed Capabilities to Our Warriors.” This memorandum, referred to throughout as the “WAS Memo”—formally redesignates the Defense Acquisition System (“DAS”) as the Warfighting Acquisition System (“WAS”), places the acquisition enterprise on a “wartime footing,” and sets forth the governance, structural, and process reforms that will shape how DoW capabilities are acquired and fielded.
This post is the second in a three-part series analyzing these reforms. In our first post, we examined the WAS Memo’s new emphasis on commercial products and offerings as the preferred acquisition approach. This post turns to the broader restructuring initiatives contained in the WAS Memo and its accompanying Acquisition Transformation Strategy.
Continue Reading From DAS to WAS: Secretary Hegseth’s Acquisition Overhaul and What It Means for IndustryContractors Should Not Overlook the Administration’s Call to Action on Commerciality
Last week, Secretary Hegseth delivered a speech at the National War College introducing transformations to the defense procurement process. Among them, the Secretary discussed awarding companies bigger and longer contracts for proven systems; removing “excessive and burdensome” requirements (for example, acquisition rules, accounting standards, and testing oversight); and empowering program leaders with authority to direct program outcomes, move money, and adjust priorities. Overall, the speech outlined a vision for a more agile defense procurement process that leans heavily on practices already proven and featured in the commercial sector.
Continue Reading Contractors Should Not Overlook the Administration’s Call to Action on CommercialityJCIDS, Rewired: What DoD’s New Requirements Memo Means
On August 20, 2025, the Department of Defense (“DoD”) issued a sweeping memo that tears up and rebuilds the way the military decides what new weapons and systems it needs. The Military Services appear to be wasting no time translating the memo into action. Acquisition leaders at last week’s Association of the United States Army conference emphasized that “Transforming in Contact” will serve as the framework for redefining requirements and reprioritizing programs—demonstrating that reform is already underway. For its part, the Air Force has begun reorganizing its A5/7 directorate to assume greater responsibility for requirements generation, while the Chief of Space Operations has publicly outlined the Space Force path to driving requirements and resourcing.
This “requirements process” is the first step in acquisition—it defines the problem and tells the rest of the system what to buy, build, or develop. Change the requirements process and you change the entire defense marketplace. For decades, DoD has used a system called the Joint Capabilities Integration and Development System (“JCIDS”). JCIDS was paperwork-heavy and checklist-driven: the Military Services (Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps, Space Force) would write lengthy justifications for new programs, and those proposals would wind their way through layers of approval at the Joint Staff in the Pentagon. Critics said JCIDS was too slow and too rigid for modern threats, especially as China and other adversaries innovate quickly.
The August 20 memo blows up that model. In its place, DoD is putting forward a problem-focused approach that aims to:
- Define the biggest operational challenges first(not just collect Military Service wish lists)
- Tie priorities to moneyso “important” projects actually get funded
- Bring industry into the process earlierthrough experiments, not just proposals
- Cut out layers of low value review
Below we unpack the memo and offer five practical takeaways for industry.
Continue Reading JCIDS, Rewired: What DoD’s New Requirements Memo Means