We represent clients at every stage in the contracting process: from proposal submission to contract closure, through claims and dispute resolution, and at every critical step in between. We also assist clients at every stage of their own lifecycle: from establishing the company and building out policies and procedures, to preparing for the due diligence process and taking clients through closing a successful sale. We also assist clients in M&A acquisition activities.
We provide clients with advice on compliance with contract requirements and regulatory issues to avoid disputes and minimize clients' liability exposure. When unavoidable disputes arise, the firm's skilled litigators have successfully represented clients before the Boards of Contract Appeals, federal and state courts, administrative agencies and arbitration forums.
Our team's broad experience enables us to cover all aspects of Government Contracting:
False Claims Act
Mandatory Disclosure
Foreign Corrupt Practices Act
Procurement Integrity Act
Claims and Requests for Equitable Adjustment
Contract Terminations and Close-Outs
Prime/Sub Disputes
Cybersecurity
Bid Protests
Audits, including DCAA cost and pricing issues
Government investigations, including OIG investigations
Suspensions and Debarments
Government Contracts Alternative Dispute Resolution
Construction Contracting, including challenging default terminations
International Procurement, including international compliance and disputes
Corporate Transactions/Government Contracts, including preparation for M&A due diligence
Corporate formation and Affiliation issues
Government Contract Preparation and Negotiation
Subcontracts, Teaming Agreements, Joint Ventures and Strategic Alliances
Compliance and Ethics Counseling
Labor and Employment Standards
Small and Disadvantaged Business Concerns
Security Clearance Issues
Political Law Compliance, Pay-to-Play laws and Entertainment/Gifting
Meeting Your Needs:
Because clients' government contracts issues are often intertwined with issues in other areas of law, the Government Contracts Group routinely coordinates with other firm practice groups to meet those needs:
For companies whose operations are subject to strict federal regulations – and particularly those that are facing or may be facing enforcement actions – take note. The U.S. Supreme Court may have just leveled the playing field. On Friday, June 28, 2024, the Supreme Court overturned a long-standing legal precedent that instructed courts to defer to federal agencies’ interpretations of ambiguous laws they administer. Instead, federal laws will be interpreted by the courts. Federal agencies will need to prove their cases, including enforcement actions where an arguably ambiguous statute is at issue. This is good news for businesses in the U.S.
On March 1, 2024, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama in National Small Business United et al. v. Janet Yellen et. al., Case No. 5:22-cv-1448-LCB, held the Corporate Transparency Act (the “CTA”) to be unconstitutional. In this surprising decision, U.S. District Court Judge Liles C. Burke ruled “The CTA is unconstitutional because it cannot be justified as exercise of Congress’ enumerated powers.”
The Corporate Transparency Act’s (the “CTA”) reporting requirements are effective as of January 1, 2024. As a result, many companies in the United States will have to report information about their beneficial owners, i.e., the individuals who ultimately own or control the company. They will have to report the information to the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN), a bureau of the U.S. Department of the Treasury.
A recent federal district court decision in the case of Ultima Servs. Corp. v. U.S. Dep’t of Agric. resulted in an injunction against the U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA), prohibiting the agency from applying a rebuttable presumption of social disadvantage based on being a part of the Black, Hispanic, Asian Pacific, and Native American races in the administration of its 8(a) Business Development Program.
On January 1, 2021, heightened entity and beneficial ownership reporting arrived in the United States with the enactment of the Corporate Transparency Act (the “CTA”), part of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021. The policy behind the CTA is to strengthen reporting and transparency as to who the beneficial economic owners are of business enterprises doing business in the United States. Prior to the passage of the CTA, the United States was viewed by some in the international marketplace as a tax haven for those looking to create shell companies to hide their assets through the formation of business entities in jurisdictions like Delaware or Florida, for instance.
The Department of Defense (DOD) recently announced a pilot program to incentivize contracting with employee-owned businesses, otherwise known as ESOPs, or companies owned by an Employee Stock Ownership Program. Authorized by Section 874 of the National Defense Authorization Act for FY 2022 (Pub. L. 117-81), this program will allow DOD to award certain follow-on contracts on a non-competitive basis to ESOPs. Contracting Officers (CO) supporting this program will be able to award a follow-on contract for the continued development, production, or provision of products or services that are the same or substantially similar to those procured by DOD under a previous contract with a “qualified business.” The qualifying ESOP companies are not required to be a small business.
Being a government contractor is hard; the rules are complex, and the penalties for non-compliance can be harsh. So, when the President of the United States tells the world that there will be a vaccine mandate for U.S. government contractors, contractors might have some questions.
At a time when contractors are attempting to implement shifting and unclear cybersecurity requirements, the United States Department of Justice (DOJ) is now promising to wield the False Claims Act when it – in its sole discretion – finds contract performance wanting.
In the wake of the Colonial Pipeline Hack, on May 12, 2021, the Biden Administration issued an Executive Order (EO) on Improving the Nation’s Cybersecurity. The Government is proposing broad changes to the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) and Department of Defense FAR Supplement (DFARS) in two areas. What do government contractors need to know?
R&D Contractors Implore Congress To Restore Crucial Tax Incentive
Incumbent’s Non-Compete Agreements Did Not Lead To Successful Protest
Contractor Turns Size Protest Into Federal Claims Act Case Resulting In Favorable Federal Court Decision, Upending Sba’s Traditional Method For Calculating Size Of A Small Business
New Initiative Launched To Increase Federal Contracting With Small Disadvantaged Businesses
Whiteford announced that Senior Counsel and Government Contracts Practice Lead Ralph C. Thomas III has been elected Chair of the Federal Bar Association's (FBA) Government Contracts Section by its members and will assume his new role effective November 1, 2024.
Whiteford, Taylor & Preston announced that Ralph C. Thomas III and Sean Trice have joined the firm’s Washington, D.C. office in the Government Contracts practice.
A Whiteford, Taylor & Preston litigation team led by Allen Foster, Erik Bolog, Eric Rowe and Adrian Snead has achieved a significant litigation victory on behalf of Wye Oak Technology.
