1. Home
  2. |Insights
  3. |Rare Decision about Pricing Interorganizational Transfers

Rare Decision about Pricing Interorganizational Transfers

Client Alert | 1 min read | 02.14.17

In rare litigation over the pricing of items transferred between a contractor’s commonly controlled subdivisions, C&M successfully appealed a Contracting Officer’s refusal to pay commercial prices for materials a contractor had transferred between its business units. In A-T Solutions, Inc. (ATS), ASBCA No. 59338, the Board found that ATS was permitted to transfer at price under FAR 31.205-26(e) because it had demonstrated an “established practice” of pricing interorganizational transfers at other than cost for commercial work, as evidenced by records and the testimony of ATS’ witnesses and accounting expert. The Board rejected the Government’s argument that ATS’ internal transfers lacked “economic substance,” holding that FAR 31.205-26(e) does not impose any “economic substance” requirement and that ATS’ internal transfers were adequately recorded at price, notwithstanding limitations in the detail provided by ATS’ accounting software.

Insights

Client Alert | 3 min read | 08.03.26

New Jersey Takes Aim at Algorithmic and Surveillance Pricing: What Landlords and Retailers Need to Know About the FAIR Act and the Fair Price Protection Act

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....