1. Home
  2. |Insights
  3. |Scope of Proposed Rule on Self-Reporting is Expanded and Would Also Require Self-Reporting of FCA Violations and Contract Overpayments

Scope of Proposed Rule on Self-Reporting is Expanded and Would Also Require Self-Reporting of FCA Violations and Contract Overpayments

Client Alert | 1 min read | 05.16.08

The FAR Secretariat today published for public comment an amendment to the proposed rule (73 FR 28407, May 16, 2008) that was previously published at the request of DOJ, to require contractors to have a code of ethics and business conduct and to notify the agency’s Office of Inspector General and the Contracting Officer whenever there is a “reasonable” basis to believe there has been a violation of federal criminal law in connection with a federal contract or subcontract. The amended proposed rule no longer exempts commercial item contracts and contracts that are performed outside the United States and, again at the request of DOJ, adds a requirement that contractors also report violations of the civil False Claims Act as well as contract overpayments, with knowing failures to report such violations being an additional cause for debarment or suspension.

Insights

Client Alert | 3 min read | 06.12.26

DOJ Guidance Backs Away From Disparate Impact Liability

On June 9, 2026, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) issued a formal opinion concluding that the Equal Opportunity Employment Commission’s (EEOC) existing interpretations of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII) disparate-impact liability, including the Uniform Guidelines on Employee Selection Procedures (UGESP), are unconstitutional. According to the opinion, EEOC’s prior interpretations contemplate liability based on disproportionately adverse effects alone, without regard to an employer’s likely intent, rather than treating disparate impact as an evidentiary mechanism to “smoke out” intentional discrimination. DOJ found that this approach functions as a “qualified racial-proportionality mandate” that places “a racial thumb on the scales, often requiring employers to evaluate the racial outcomes of their policies, and to make decisions based on (because of) those racial outcomes.” The opinion fulfills one mandate of Executive Order 14281, which rejected disparate-impact liability insofar as it “creates a near insurmountable presumption that unlawful discrimination exists wherever there are any differences in outcomes among different [demographic groups].”...