OMB Seeks to Revise the Small Business Act – Another Shot at the Rule of Two
Concerns are mounting that the Revolutionary FAR Overhaul will eliminate the regulatory “Rule of Two” found in FAR Part 19. Now, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) is going further—seeking to narrow the reach of the statutory Rule of Two by revising the Small Business Act. Specifically, OMB wants to change the requirement from applying to purchases “below the simplified acquisition threshold (SAT)” to applying only to purchases below “$250,000.” At the same time, OMB proposes raising the SAT . . . Read More
Could You Qualify as Small Under SBA’s Proposed Revisions to Receipts-Based Size Standards?
On August 22, 2025, the Small Business Administration (SBA) issued a proposed rule entitled “Small Business Size Standards: Monetary-Based Industry Size Standard,” which proposes to increase the size standard for 263 industries and retain the receipts-based size standards for 237 industries and sub-industries. A proposed rule for employee-based size standard will be published in the near future. SBA’s proposed changes may allow some GovCons to stay small longer—or even regain small business status. Knowing the correct size standard and calculation is critical . . . Read More
How the Boards of Contract Appeals Work—And Why It Matters for Your Bottom Line, Part 4
Government contractors, particularly small business contractors, often share that their experience with Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) is costly and inefficient. This may be true of traditional ADR involving paid neutrals or mediation services, as often found in binding arbitration clauses within subcontracts. However, the stated goals of ADR before the Boards of Contract Appeals (BCA) are informality, expedience, and inexpensiveness. Where settlement negotiations fail but both the government and the contractor are still interested in resolving the dispute before a . . . Read More
DOD Push for Commercial Item and Service Contracting Increases Defense Contracting Opportunities
PilieroMazza recently highlighted a Department of Defense (DOD) memo (linked here ) requiring DOD Components to adopt the Software Acquisition Pathway (SWP) as the preferred acquisition method for business and weapon system programs. The memo also recommends using the Commercial Solutions Opening (CSO) and Other Transactions (OT) as the default solicitation and award approach (visit this link to access our blog series and webinar on “The Rise of OTA in Defense Contracting”). As DOD and other agencies are expected to increase Commercial . . . Read More
Managing Litigation Risk During the Business Lifecycle, Part 6: Minority Stakeholder Interests and Oppression
There is a common misconception that ownership equals control. But in many businesses—especially those participating in the Small Business Administration’s (SBA) 8(a), Women-Owned Small Business (WOSB), or Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned Small Business (SDVOSB) programs—the reality is far more complex. As companies grow, take on investment, or bring in new members, questions of ownership rights, decision-making authority, and fiduciary duties become increasingly fraught. For minority stakeholders, the risk of being sidelined is real. And for majority owners, mismanaging that balance can trigger . . . Read More
FAR Part 6 Rewrite: What It Means for Small Business Set-Asides, Socioeconomic Programs, and the Rule of Two
The recent rewrite of the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Part 6—governing “Competition Requirements”—is prompting questions about whether the changes may signal a shift in federal small business contracting policy. In particular, the removal of explicit references to certain socioeconomic program provisions raises concerns in the small business community. In this blog, PilieroMazza dissects the FAR Part 6 rewrite, concluding that most revisions appear to be structural rather than substantive. However, the unresolved status of the “Rule of Two” continues to . . . Read More
Cybersecurity, AI, and EO 14306: What Government Contractors Must Do to Stay Compliant
In June 2025, President Trump signed Executive Order 14306 (EO), titled “Sustaining Select Efforts to Strengthen the Nation’s Cybersecurity and Amending Executive Order 13694 and Executive Order 14144,” which amends and supersedes portions of President Biden’s [1] and President Obama’s [2] executive orders on cybersecurity. The EO was accompanied by a Fact Sheet , which provides further reasoning for the revisions. Although the EO amends and supersedes portions of President Biden’s and President Obama’s executive orders, it generally leaves the framework established by these orders in place. . . . Read More
How the Boards of Contract Appeals Work—And Why It Matters for Your Bottom Line, Part 3
Generally, government contractors proceeding towards a Board of Contract Appeals (BCA) decision are wise to take the safe, traditional route. While it can be a long and winding road—engaging in pleadings, discovery, a hearing, and a decision—this process presents the least risk of getting lost. For risk-averse contractors whose priority is having their legal issues fully investigated, considered, and addressed by the BCAs, this is often the best strategy. However, in certain situations—e.g., when the parties urgently need the BCA’s . . . Read More
GSA MAS Refresh #27: Mandatory Transactional Data Reporting and Other Key Changes
On June 26, 2025, the General Services Administration (GSA) released MAS Refresh #27 —the latest GSA Multiple Award Schedule (MAS) solicitation update and mass modification. Among other changes, Refresh #27 significantly expands the use of Transactional Data Reporting (TDR), making it mandatory for contracts containing one of the 177 TDR-eligible Special Item Numbers (SINs). Further, GSA intends to make TDR mandatory for all MAS contracts in an upcoming refresh anticipated in Fiscal Year (FY) 2026. This move marks a major expansion of GSA’s . . . Read More
The CPAR Trap: What SLSCO Teaches Contractors About Challenging Performance Ratings
Contractor Performance Assessment Reports (CPARs) are a critical currency in the world of government contracting—shaping future awards, past‐performance evaluations, and a contractor’s reputation. Positive assessments can help contractors secure future work with the government, while even a single marginal or unsatisfactory rating can ripple across future procurements, damaging a contractor’s competitive standing for years. When a contractor receives a negative CPAR, it must act quickly to correct issues with the ratings and recommendations before government customers rely on the negative . . . Read More