1. Home
  2. |Insights
  3. |A New Dawn or New Nightmare: Will Transactional Data Reporting Reduce, or Merely Shift, GSA Schedule Contractors' Compliance Burden?

A New Dawn or New Nightmare: Will Transactional Data Reporting Reduce, or Merely Shift, GSA Schedule Contractors' Compliance Burden?

Client Alert | 1 min read | 06.23.16

Despite competing concerns expressed by both contractors and the IG, on June 23, 2016, GSA published a final rule proceeding with a pilot program imposing substantial monthly transactional data reporting obligations on contractors but relieving them from the burden of both commercial sales practices data submissions and the monitoring of commercial sales to tracking customers, as well as from the threat of price readjustments and possible FCA liability under the Price Reduction clause. The pilot program will initially apply to new contracts (and existing contracts where contractors elect to participate) under select GSA Schedules accounting for approximately 43 percent of GSA Schedule purchases, including Schedule 70 (Information Technology) and 00CORP (Professional Services), and continue for at least one year as GSA evaluates its ability effectively to collect and use transactional data and price analysis to assure better pricing for GSA Schedule customers.

Contacts

Insights

Client Alert | 5 min read | 12.12.25

Eleventh Circuit Hears Argument on False Claims Act Qui Tam Constitutionality

On the morning of December 12, 2025, the Eleventh Circuit heard argument in United States ex rel. Zafirov v. Florida Medical Associates, LLC, et al., No. 24-13581 (11th Cir. 2025). This case concerns the constitutionality of the False Claims Act (FCA) qui tam provisions and a groundbreaking September 2024 opinion in which the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida held that the FCA’s qui tam provisions were unconstitutional under Article II. See United States ex rel. Zafirov v. Fla. Med. Assocs., LLC, 751 F. Supp. 3d 1293 (M.D. Fla. 2024). That decision, penned by District Judge Kathryn Kimball Mizelle, was the first success story for a legal theory that has been gaining steam ever since Justices Thomas, Barrett, and Kavanaugh indicated they would be willing to consider arguments about the constitutionality of the qui tam provisions in U.S. ex rel. Polansky v. Exec. Health Res., 599 U.S. 419 (2023). In her opinion, Judge Mizelle held (1) qui tam relators are officers of the U.S. who must be appointed under the Appointments Clause; and (2) historical practice treating qui tam and similar relators as less than “officers” for constitutional purposes was not enough to save the qui tam provisions from the fundamental Article II infirmity the court identified. That ruling was appealed and, after full briefing, including by the government and a bevy of amici, the litigants stepped up to the plate this morning for oral argument....

View All Insights