Dissertation/Thesis Abstract

The Independent Research & Development Cost Definition: A Dinosaur Needing An Overhaul
by Taylor, Arthur Michael, LL.M., The George Washington University, 2010, 81; 1483983
Abstract (Summary)

The Armed Services Procurement Regulations Committee promulgated the current definition for Independent Research and Development (IR&D costs in 1971. That definition excludes from IR&D the cost of effort “required in the performance of a contract.” This language has long perplexed contractors and the government resulting in difficulty in determining when to charge the cost of certain development effort as an IR&D cost. Moreover, this IR&D regulatory definition is inconsistent with other more current regulations defining direct and indirect costs, and fails to reflect the current government policy encouraging contractors to engage in IR&D effort. Finally, the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals recent decision in ATK Thiokol, Inc. v. United States found this regulatory language to be ambiguous. Unfortunately, the Federal Circuit's interpretation of the language creates additional problems by letting the individual contracting parties determine what is an IR&D cost. For the reasons discussed below, this paper proposes changing the definition of IR&D costs from excluding the cost of effort “required in the performance of a contract” to exclude those costs “specifically identified with a contract.”

Indexing (document details)
Advisor: Schooner, Steven L.
School: The George Washington University
Department: Law
School Location: United States -- District of Columbia
Source: MAI 49/03M, Masters Abstracts International
Subjects: Law
Keywords: Cost Accounting Standard 420, Federal Acquisition Regulation 31.205-18, Government contracts, Independent research and development
Publication Number: 1483983
ISBN: 978-1-124-39891-4
Copyright © 2020 ProQuest LLC. All rights reserved. Terms and Conditions Privacy Policy Cookie Policy