More Confusion On What Costs Are Allocable To Government Contracts
Client Alert | 1 min read | 01.16.09
In a puzzling decision about what appear to be independent research and development (IR&D) costs associated with creating a new software product, Teknowledge Corp. v. U.S. (Jan. 7, 2009), neither party seems to have cited the relevant allocation and allowability rules in Cost Accounting Standard 420, incorporated by reference in FAR 31.205-18, and the CFC's opinion does not mention them, instead sustaining disallowance of the costs on the ground that they did not "benefit" the government. Under the provisions of CAS 420, IR&D costs of a business unit are generally allocable to the contracts of that business unit, and it is not clear based on the facts as described in the opinion whether the costs at issue were incurred in a commercial business unit, a home office, or a government contracts business unit, so it is impossible to determine whether the costs would have been allocable to and allowable on the contracts of the Government business unit if CAS 420 had been appropriately applied.
Insights
Client Alert | 3 min read | 07.17.26
In the underlying litigation, Epic Games alleged that Apple violated antitrust and unfair competition laws by engaging in anti-steering behavior related to purchases on Apple’s in-app payment system. Apple received a percentage of payments made through this system, and Epic Games argued that Apple prohibited app developers from informing users about alternative payment options.
Client Alert | 2 min read | 07.15.26
CMMC Phase II Suspension Requires Reconsideration of Such Requirements in Solicitations
Client Alert | 3 min read | 07.15.26
Client Alert | 3 min read | 07.14.26
