Compounding The Problem
Client Alert | 1 min read | 09.24.10
On September 22, 2010, the Civilian Agency Acquisition Council and Defense Acquisition Regulations Council issued a proposed rule that would amend the FAR to require compound, rather than simple, interest to be used in calculating damages for violations of the Truth in Negotiations Act (TINA). The proposal follows the problematic analysis in Gates v. Raytheon, 584 F.3d 1062 (Fed. Cir. 2009), which held that, because the Cost Accounting Standards (CAS) statute requires interest on cost impacts for CAS violations to be calculated at the rate established under 26 U.S.C. § 6621, the same rate referenced in the TINA statute, the interest must be compounded in accordance with 26 U.S.C. § 6622, even though the CAS statute does not refer to or incorporate § 6622 by reference.
Insights
Client Alert | 6 min read | 06.09.26
Is Stock-a-palooza Over? Supreme Court allows SEC to Pursue Disgorgement
On June 4, 2026, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously held that the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) can continue to pursue disgorgement as an equitable remedy in securities fraud cases without showing pecuniary loss by investors. The Court’s ruling in Sripetch v. SEC resolves a split between the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, which concluded that the SEC must demonstrate pecuniary loss, and the U.S. Courts of Appeals for the First and Ninth Circuits, which declined to require such a showing.
Client Alert | 2 min read | 06.09.26
Client Alert | 7 min read | 06.09.26
Client Alert | 11 min read | 06.08.26
