ASBCA Finds Stock Option Costs Based on Black-Scholes Model Unallowable
Client Alert | 1 min read | 01.22.18
In Luna Innovations, Inc. (ASBCA No. 60086), the Board determined that Luna’s stock option costs were unallowable (but not expressly unallowable) pursuant to FAR 31.205-6(i), because such costs “constitute[d] compensation that [were] determined by changes in stock prices.” Specifically, the Board concluded that Luna’s stock option costs were unallowable because they were “valued using the Black-Scholes model,” which relies upon five inputs, including the stock price variance. According to the Board, the Black-Scholes model not only “values” a stock option, but “the value is ‘based on’ share price volatility.” Indeed, the Board found that “the volatility measure is one of the most important, if not the most important, inputs into [such model], such that the compensation is ‘based on’ on [sic] asset volatility.” Though the Board concluded that such costs were unallowable, it did not agree with the Government that they were expressly unallowable. In this respect, the Board recognized “significant differences” existed between the Black-Scholes model that Luna used and “the TSR equation at issue in Raytheon and Exelis,” namely that the latter “determined the number of shares to be awarded based explicitly on the change in share prices during the evaluation period.” The Board also pointed out that “the use of the Black-Scholes model [was] a question of firm impression” and “there [were] legitimate differences of opinion regarding the allowability of the costs at issue in this appeal.”
Contacts
Insights
Client Alert | 7 min read | 12.17.25
After hosting a series of workshops and issuing multiple rounds of materials, including enforcement notices, checklists, templates, and other guidance, the California Air Resources Board (CARB) has proposed regulations to implement the Climate Corporate Data Accountability Act (SB 253) and the Climate-Related Financial Risk Act (SB 261) (both as amended by SB 219), which require large U.S.-based businesses operating in California to disclose greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and climate-related risks. CARB also published a Notice of Public Hearing and an Initial Statement of Reasons along with the proposed regulations. While CARB’s final rules were statutorily required to be promulgated by July 1, 2025, these are still just proposals. CARB’s proposed rules largely track earlier guidance regarding how CARB intends to define compliance obligations, exemptions, and key deadlines, and establish fee programs to fund regulatory operations.
Client Alert | 1 min read | 12.17.25
Client Alert | 7 min read | 12.17.25
Executive Order Tries to Thwart “Onerous” AI State Regulation, Calls for National Framework
Client Alert | 4 min read | 12.17.25
The new EU Bioeconomy Strategy: a regulatory framework in transition



