In the commercial world, it’s normal to buy a good customer a holiday gift. But when your customer is Uncle Sam, you might break the law by giving that same gift.
The government contracting ethics rules aren’t always as cut-and-dried as “don’t give the contracting officer a briefcase full of unmarked bills” (although you shouldn’t do that, either!) and the government’s rules sometimes vary from commercial norms. On June 10, please join me and Shane McCall as we cover the key ethics and related rules contractors should know, including gift/gratuity rules, the False Claims Act, Procurement Integrity Act, anti-kickback rules, contingency fee restrictions, conflicts of interest and much more.
This webinar is hosted by our friends at Govology and it’s easy to register: just click here. Shane and I hope to see you on June 10!
The ongoing federal movement to prevent fraud waste, and abuse in the contracting process continues. And as demonstrated in a recent federal court decision, the government retains its ability to refuse to pay a procurement contract tainted by fraud.
In the recent decision of Laguna Construction Company, Inc. v. Ashton Carter, Appeal Number 15-1291, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed that a procurement contract tainted by violations of the Anti-Kickback Act is voidable under the doctrine of prior material breach.
A New York contractor has agreed to pay $2.72 million to resolve claims that it violated the Anti-Kickback Act and False Claims Act in connection with its prime contract work on an EPA facility.
According to a Department of Justice press release, Sevenson Environmental Services Inc. accepted more than $1.6 million in kickbacks from six subcontractors, then passed the majority of those kickbacks through to the EPA.