Insights

Click below to listen or access from one of these links:

Crowell hosts Nicole Simonian and Dj Wolff continue their conversation with Dan Cannistra on the Trump Administration tariffs. This session focuses on recent modifications to the automotive/auto parts tariffs, including discussion about the impact of the recent Executive Order “Addressing Certain Tariffs on Imported Articles” and other related guidance. Global Trade Talks is a podcast that shares brief perspectives on key global issues on international trade, current events, business, law, and public policy as they impact our lives.

In the wake of the Trump Administration’s recent scrutiny of various nonprofit organizations, including Harvard University, and threats to revoke organizations’ tax-exempt status, nonprofit organizations should take proactive steps in the event of an IRS audit that may target their federal tax-exempt status. Proactive planning and preparation measures are essential to being well-equipped to deal with potential IRS inquiries or an audit. The faster and more efficiently an IRS inquiry can be concluded, the better likelihood of avoiding a full audit or worse, revocation of status. An organization may be particularly vulnerable where there has been any level of political involvement that could be viewed as controversial, but also involvement with activities and efforts focused on renewable energy and diversity, equity & inclusion (“DEI”) may now cause additional scrutiny of an organization’s tax-exempt status. Common potential foot-faults that can bring an organization into the crosshairs (and which are oftentimes not fully considered in light of potential risk of revocation of tax-exempt status) include negotiating typical agreements, including commercial contracting and similar arrangements, where contractual provisions may call for representations and commitments from a non-profit around its DEI efforts or similar efforts. Extra care should be taken to review such instances and other potential activities that may increase the organization’s risk of IRS audit.

On April 23, 2025, President Trump signed an executive order, Restoring Equality of Opportunity and Meritocracy, declaring it the policy of the United States “to eliminate the use of disparate-impact liability in all contexts to the maximum degree possible to avoid violating the constitution, Federal civil rights laws, and basic American ideals.” The order reasons that “disparate impact liability all but requires individuals and businesses to consider race and engage in racial balancing to avoid potentially crippling legal liability.”

This week’s episode features a discussion of several common government contractor questions involving payment delays, cost increases due to tariffs, and inability to obtain certain government approvals. This episode is hosted by Peter Eyre and Skye Mathieson. Crowell & Moring's "Fastest 5 Minutes" is a biweekly podcast that provides a brief summary of significant government contracts legal and regulatory developments that no government contracts lawyer or executive should be without.

This week’s episode features a deep-dive on Executive Order 14265, Modernizing Defense Acquisitions and Spurring Innovation in the Defense Industrial Base, which calls for a “comprehensive overhaul” of the DoD acquisition system to deliver state‐of‐the‐art capabilities at speed and scale. This episode is hosted by Yuan Zhou, Jon Baker, and Eric Ransom. Crowell & Moring's "Fastest 5 Minutes" is a biweekly podcast that provides a brief summary of significant government contracts legal and regulatory developments that no government contracts lawyer or executive should be without.

On April 16, 2025, the White House issued an Executive Order (“EO”), “Ensuring Commercial, Cost-Effective Solutions in Federal Contracts,” requiring agencies to meet their needs with commercially available products and services to the maximum extent practicable. The EO reiterates and builds upon the requirements set forth in the Federal Acquisition Streamlining Act of 1994 (“FASA”), which similarly encourages the use of commercial acquisition procedures. Specifically, the EO institutes a required review procedure for certain open acquisition actions and establishes an oversight procedure to be implemented for all acquisitions hereafter.

On April 15, 2025, the White House issued an Executive Order (“EO”), “Restoring Common Sense to Federal Procurement” calling for the reform of the Federal Acquisition Regulation (“FAR”) consistent with the aims of EO 14192, “Unleashing Prosperity Through Deregulation,” which sought to eliminate perceived unnecessary regulatory burdens. Specifically, the April EO notes that the FAR should only contain statutorily required provisions or those “essential to sound procurement,” and it recommends the removal of any FAR provisions that do not advance these objectives.

Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (“FCPA”) enforcement has been fairly predictable for many years as the Fraud Section of the Department of Justice (“DOJ”) has maintained exclusive authority over investigating claims and bringing enforcement actions in federal courts across the country. President Trump’s recent pause on FCPA enforcement, the first of its kind since the statute was passed in 1977, has created significant uncertainty for individuals and businesses operating internationally regarding the future of FCPA enforcement. While DOJ is in the process of assessing what the future of FCPA enforcement, state attorneys general are stepping in. On April 2, California Attorney General Rob Bonta issued a Legal Advisory (the “Advisory”) to California businesses explaining that violations of the FCPA are actionable under California’s Unfair Competition Law (UCL). The announcement signals a shift in FCPA enforcement where states may take the lead and pursue FCPA enforcement through their state unfair competition laws.

On March 27, 2025, HHS announced a “dramatic restructuring” of its various agencies and offices in accordance with President Trump's Executive Order, “Implementing the President’s ‘Department of Government Efficiency’ Workforce Optimization Initiative.” HHS also published a Fact Sheet.

This week’s episode features a deep dive on the President’s Executive Order, Eliminating Waste and Saving Taxpayer Dollars by Consolidating Procurement, which directs the consolidation of certain types of “domestic federal procurement” under the General Services Administration in an effort to “eliminate waste and duplication.”  This episode is hosted by Peter Eyre and Yuan Zhou. Crowell & Moring's "Fastest 5 Minutes" is a biweekly podcast that provides a brief summary of significant government contracts legal and regulatory developments that no government contracts lawyer or executive should be without.

On March 20, 2025, President Trump signed an Executive Order titled “Improving Education Outcomes by Empowering Parents, States, and Communities”.

On March 20, 2025, the White House issued Executive Order (“EO”), “Eliminating Waste and Saving Taxpayer Dollars by Consolidating Procurement,” to consolidate domestic civilian contracting for “common goods and services” within one agency—the General Services Administration (“GSA”). The EO defines “common goods and services” as those described in the Category Management system first developed as part of a previous effort, dating back to 2014, to coordinate spending across the government.

Click below to listen or access from one of these links:

On February 26, 2025, the White House issued an Executive Order (“EO”), “Implementing the President’s ‘Department of Government Efficiency’ Cost Efficiency Initiative,” to transform federal spending on “covered” contracts, grants, and loans. The EO defines “[c]overed contracts and grants” as “discretionary spending through Federal contracts, grants, loans, and related instruments, but excludes direct assistance to individuals; expenditures related to immigration enforcement, law enforcement, the military, public safety, and the intelligence community; and other critical, acute, or emergency spending, as determined by the relevant Agency Head.”

On February 21, 2025, President Trump issued a National Security Policy Memorandum (“NSPM”) announcing the Administration’s “America First Investment Policy” (the “Investment Policy”)[1] affirming the United States’ commitment to open investment while safeguarding national security. Aimed at promoting investment in the United States from allied countries while imposing stricter measures on both inbound and outbound investments from “foreign adversaries,” the Investment Policy incentivizes foreign investment in the United States by announcing a “fast track” process “to facilitate greater investment from specified allied and partner sources in United States businesses involved with United States advanced technology and other important areas.” The NSPM defines “foreign adversaries” to include the People’s Republic of China (the “PRC” or “China”), including Hong Kong and Macau, Cuba, Iran, North Korea, Russia, and the Maduro regime in Venezuela.[2]

Late on Friday, a federal judge in Maryland issued a preliminary injunction pausing certain elements of the Trump Administration’s two recent executive orders (“EOs”) addressing “illegal DEI programs.” The two EOs, Exec. Order 14151, Ending Radical and Wasteful Government DEI Programs and Preferencing (the “J20 Order”) and Exec. Order 14173, Ending Illegal Discrimination and Restoring Merit-Based Opportunity (“J21 Order”), contain a number of provisions that, among other things, direct the federal government to dismantle “illegal DEI programs” within federal agencies and federal contractors. Please refer to our prior alert on these EOs for a full breakdown of the provisions in each.

The new Trump administration is focusing intensely on “cartels” and other transnational criminal organizations, particularly in the Western Hemisphere. Many of the entities designated as FTOs today are active in Latin America and the United States, and sometimes seek to extort money or have other dealings with legitimate businesses operating in their territories. The State Department’s designation of eight such entities will not only raise the pressure on the entities designated, but also will create new risks and pressures for companies operating in areas where these FTOs are active. Below, we summarize the recent developments and the ramifications of these designations for businesses.