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”). 

CAS Threshold Increases & Partial Contract Carveouts

The FY 2026 NDAA contains three significant changes that impact whether contractors must comply with CAS.

First, Section 1806(d) of the NDAA text increases the threshold for the mandatory application of CAS at the contract level.  Currently, negotiated prime contracts or subcontracts are subject to CAS if they exceed $2.5 million in total contract value.  Section 1806(d) raises this threshold to $35 million.  This effectively eliminates the current CAS “trigger” contract mechanism, which requires the contractor to receive at least one CAS-covered contract valued at $7.5 million or more before other contracts can become CAS-covered. 

Second, Section 1806(a) doubles the threshold for the application of full CAS coverage.  Contractors may be subject to “modified” CAS coverage (in which case they must comply with a subset of the 19 cost standards) or to “full” CAS coverage (in which case they must comply with all 19 standards).  Currently, contractors are subject to full CAS if the net amount of CAS-covered awards received in a given cost accounting period is $50 million or above.  Section 1806(a) directs relevant regulations to establish a new threshold of $100 million.

Third, Section 1806(d) exempts portions of contracts from CAS.  Under this new approach, a portion of a contract may be exempt if it satisfies one of the conditions under 41 U.S.C. § 1502 (b)(1)(C), even if the contract on the whole does not qualify.  As an example, 41 U.S.C. § 1502 (b)(1)(C)(i) and (iii) will be altered so that portions of contracts or subcontracts for the acquisition of a commercial item or a firm fixed price award will not lead to application of CAS.

The draft NDAA language directs implementation of these changes no later than 180 days after enactment. 

TINA Threshold Increase

Section 1804(c) amends TINA to raise the threshold for requiring disclosure of certified cost or pricing data from contractors and subcontractors.  Under the current statute and regulations, TINA applies to contracts expected to exceed $2.5 million.  Section 1804(c) raises this threshold to $10 million for contracts entered into after June 30, 2026 (but maintains the $2.5 million standard for contracts entered into on or before June 30, 2026).

Exemptions for Nontraditional Defense Contractors

In addition to these general changes to application of CAS and TINA, the draft NDAA text introduces special exemptions from several cost accounting and pricing data requirements for nontraditional defense contractors.  “Nontraditional defense contractor” means an entity that is not currently performing and has not performed, for at least one year before the solicitation, any contract or subcontract for the Department of Defense that is subject to full CAS coverage.  Under Section 1826, these contractors are exempt from the following requirements: 

  • DFARS 252.242–7006 (Accounting System Administration)
  • DFARS 252.234–7002 (Earned Value Management System)
  • DFARS 252.215–7002 (Cost Estimating System Requirements)
  • DFARS 252.242–7004 (Material Management and Accounting System)
  • DFARS 252.245–7003 (Contractor Property Management System Administration)
  • DFARS 252.244–7001 (Contractor Purchasing System Administration)
  • DFARS 252.242–7005 (Contractor Business Systems)
  • DFARS Part 215.407 (Special Cost or Pricing Areas)
  • 10 U.S.C. 3702 (TINA)
  • FAR Part 31 (Contract Cost Principles and Procedures)

These changes reflect the administration’s goal of expanding the defense industrial base by streamlining the federal acquisition process and reducing compliance burdens.  We will continue to track how these proposed changes evolve as the NDAA is finalized into law and then implemented by regulation.

Photo of Nooree Lee Nooree Lee

Nooree Lee represents government contractors in all aspects of the procurement process and focuses his practice on the regulatory aspects of M&A activity, procurements involving emerging technologies, and international contracting matters.

Nooree advises government contractors and financial investors regarding the regulatory aspects of…

Nooree Lee represents government contractors in all aspects of the procurement process and focuses his practice on the regulatory aspects of M&A activity, procurements involving emerging technologies, and international contracting matters.

Nooree advises government contractors and financial investors regarding the regulatory aspects of corporate transactions and restructurings and – more recently – on equity investments by the U.S. government. His experience includes preparing businesses for sale, negotiating deal documents, coordinating large-scale diligence processes, and navigating pre- and post-closing regulatory approvals and integration. He has advised on 40+ M&A deals involving government contractors totaling over $30 billion in combined value. This includes Veritas Capital’s acquisition of Cubic Corp. for $2.8 billion; the acquisition of Perspecta Inc. by Veritas Capital portfolio company Peraton for $7.1 billion; and Cameco Corporation’s strategic partnership with Brookfield Renewable Partners to acquire Westinghouse Electric Company for $7.8+ billion.

Nooree also counsels clients focused on delivering emerging technologies to public sector customers. Over the past several years, his practice has expanded to include advising on the intersection of government procurement and artificial intelligence. Nooree counsels clients on the negotiation of AI-focused procurement and non-procurement agreements with the U.S. government and the rollout of federal and state-level regulations impacting the procurement and deployment of AI solutions on behalf of government agencies.

Nooree also counsels clients navigating the Foreign Military Sales (FMS) program and Foreign Military Financing (FMF) arrangements. Nooree has advised both U.S. and ex-U.S. companies in connection with defense sales to numerous foreign defense ministries, including those of Australia, Israel, Singapore, South Korea, and Taiwan.

In addition to his government contracts advising, Nooree assists clients with navigating federal Freedom of Information Act and state public records requirements, including objecting to a government agency’s proposed release of a company’s proprietary information.

Nooree maintains an active pro bono practice focusing on appeals of denied industrial security clearance applications and public housing and housing discrimination matters. In addition to his work within the firm, Nooree is an active member of the American Bar Association’s Section of Public Contract Law and has served on the Section Council and the Section’s Diversity Committee. He also served as the firm’s Fellow for the Leadership Council on Legal Diversity program in 2023.

Photo of Stephanie Barna Stephanie Barna

Stephanie Barna draws on over three decades of U.S. military and government service to provide advisory and advocacy support and counseling to clients facing policy and political challenges in the aerospace and defense sectors.

Prior to joining the firm, Stephanie was a senior…

Stephanie Barna draws on over three decades of U.S. military and government service to provide advisory and advocacy support and counseling to clients facing policy and political challenges in the aerospace and defense sectors.

Prior to joining the firm, Stephanie was a senior leader on Capitol Hill and in the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD). Most recently, she was General Counsel of the Senate Armed Services Committee, where she was responsible for the annual $740 billion National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA). Additionally, she managed the Senate confirmation of three- and four-star military officers and civilians nominated by the President for appointment to senior political positions in DoD and the Department of Energy’s national security nuclear enterprise, and was the Committee’s lead for investigations.

Previously, as a senior executive in the Office of the Army General Counsel, Stephanie served as a legal advisor to three Army Secretaries. In 2014, Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel appointed her to be the Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Manpower and Reserve Affairs. In that role, she was a principal advisor to the Secretary of Defense on all matters relating to civilian and military personnel, reserve integration, military community and family policy, and Total Force manpower and resources. Stephanie was later appointed by Secretary of Defense Jim Mattis to perform the duties of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness, responsible for programs and funding of more than $35 billion.

Stephanie was also previously the Deputy General Counsel for Operations and Personnel in the Office of the Army General Counsel. She led a team of senior lawyers in resolving the full spectrum of issues arising from Army wartime operations and the life cycle of Army military and civilian personnel. Stephanie was also a personal advisor to the Army Secretary on his institutional reorganization and business transformation initiatives and acted for the Secretary in investigating irregularities in fielding of the Multiple Launch Rocket System and classified contracts. She also played a key role in a number of high-profile personnel investigations, including the WikiLeaks breach. Prior to her appointment as Deputy, she was Associate Deputy General Counsel (Operations and Personnel) and Acting Deputy General Counsel.

Stephanie is a retired Colonel in the U.S. Army and served in the U.S. Army Judge Advocate General’s Corps as an Assistant to the General Counsel, Office of the Army General Counsel; Deputy Staff Judge Advocate, U.S. Army Special Forces Command (Airborne); Special Assistant to the Assistant Secretary of the Army (Manpower & Reserve Affairs); and General Law Attorney, Administrative Law Division.

Stephanie was selected by the National Academy of Public Administration for inclusion in its 2022 Class of Academy Fellows, in recognition of her years of public administration service and expertise.

Photo of Peter Terenzio Peter Terenzio

Peter Terenzio advises clients regarding the regulatory requirements that govern federal contractors and grantees. He focuses on helping clients navigate the Cost Accounting Standards (CAS) and the cost principles in FAR Part 31 and 2 CFR Part 200. He also routinely advises on…

Peter Terenzio advises clients regarding the regulatory requirements that govern federal contractors and grantees. He focuses on helping clients navigate the Cost Accounting Standards (CAS) and the cost principles in FAR Part 31 and 2 CFR Part 200. He also routinely advises on Other Transaction Authority (OTA) research, prototype, and production agreements.

Peter works on accounting, cost, and pricing matters, including providing day-to-day compliance advice; assisting with responses to audits and investigations and findings of potential noncompliance; and performing internal investigations of alleged violations. He also advises on other regulatory regimes, including the complicated prevailing wage rules imposed by the Davis Bacon Act (DBA) and Service Contact Act (SCA). He has particular experience with prototype OTAs issued in cutting edge fields, including quantum computing and biotechnology.

Peter also represents contractors in disputes arising under contracts and grants. He knows how to work closely with the client’s subject matter experts to prepare and submit detailed requests for equitable adjustment (REAs) to secure price or schedule relief. When contract disputes cannot be resolved amicably, he has helped clients in litigation before federal courts and the Boards of Contract Appeals.

Photo of Michael Pierce Michael Pierce

Michael Pierce is an associate in the firm’s Washington, DC office and a member of the firm’s Government Contracts Practice Group. He assists clients on a broad range of government contracting issues, with an emphasis on claims, disputes, and investigations.

Mike has an…

Michael Pierce is an associate in the firm’s Washington, DC office and a member of the firm’s Government Contracts Practice Group. He assists clients on a broad range of government contracting issues, with an emphasis on claims, disputes, and investigations.

Mike has an active investigations practice. He has represented numerous government contractors in responding to civil investigative demands and subpoenas, in addition to helping clients assess potential exposure prior to receipt of government demands. He routinely conducts investigations related to the False Claims Act, including counselling government contractors on its disclosure obligations and mitigation measures.

Mike also represents contractors in a variety of claims and disputes, including prime-subcontractor disputes and debarment actions brought by federal and state entities. He has successfully assisted clients in mitigating the effects of terminations for default, defending defective pricing claims, and arbitrating disputes related to complex teaming agreements. Mike has advised leading contractors on numerous high-stakes issues—including allegations of providing latently defective parts—in disputes with primes, subcontractors, and the government.

Photo of Eunsun Cho Eunsun Cho

Eunsun Cho is an associate in the Government Contracts Practice Group. She assists clients on a range of regulatory and compliance issues.

Eunsun also maintains an active pro bono practice.