1. Home
  2. |Insights
  3. |CAS Offsets Permitted Among Different Contract Types

CAS Offsets Permitted Among Different Contract Types

Client Alert | less than 1 min read | 04.14.06

In an important case of first impression, the Court of Federal Claims in Lockheed Martin Corp. v. United States (Mar. 29, 2006) has held that the cost impact of a Cost Accounting Standard (CAS) noncompliance is the net of all increased costs and all decreased costs that result from the noncompliance on all CAS-covered contracts. The Court rejected the government's argument that decreased costs paid on fixed-price contracts could not be offset against increased costs paid on cost-reimbursement contracts, finding that it "is -- in a word -- wrong."

Insights

Client Alert | 3 min read | 08.03.26

New Jersey Takes Aim at Algorithmic and Surveillance Pricing: What Landlords and Retailers Need to Know About the FAIR Act and the Fair Price Protection Act

On July 20, 2026, New Jersey Governor Mikie Sherrill signed the Forbidding the Algorithmic Inflation of Rent (FAIR) Act into law, making New Jersey the fourth state to regulate algorithmic rent-setting practices. Three days later, on July 23, 2026, Governor Sherrill signed the Fair Price Protection Act, which targets “surveillance pricing”—the practice of using or collecting personal data about a user and using an algorithm or artificial intelligence to charge different consumers different prices for the same products. Together, these laws represent a significant expansion of New Jersey's consumer protection framework in the algorithmic pricing context....