ASBCA Decision a Mixed Bag on Cost Allowability Issues
Client Alert | 1 min read | 05.17.17
In Raytheon Co., ASBCA No. 57743, et al., the Board addressed penalties associated with various unallowable costs, finding that salaries of employees engaged in unallowable lobbying activities were “expressly unallowable” as “directly associated costs,” and subject to level 1 penalties, even though “directly associated costs” are, by definition, not expressly unallowable. The Board also found that costs that Raytheon had previously agreed to treat as unallowable, but erroneously included in incurred cost submissions, were not subject to level 1 penalties because they were not expressly unallowable (the Government apparently did not argue that such costs were subject to level 2 penalties). Finally, the Board held that testimony and other credible evidence can be used to demonstrate allowability of consultant costs in the absence of perfect documentation, and that a contractor must prove the CO’s failure to waive penalties for expressly unallowable costs is an arbitrary and capricious abuse of discretion.
Contacts
Insights
Client Alert | 3 min read | 08.03.26
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.
Client Alert | 2 min read | 08.03.26
New York Becomes First State to Restrict Addictive Social Media Features for Minors
Client Alert | 4 min read | 08.03.26
Client Alert | 6 min read | 08.03.26
The Pipe, Not the Posts: How Section 230’s Protections Extend to Generative AI Platforms


