As frequent SmallGovCon readers know, the Small Business Administration’s ostensible subcontractor rule can be tricky to navigate. The rule requires contractors not to rely too heavily on a subcontractor in the performance of a contract set aside under an SBA socioeconomic program, but what constitutes relying too heavily can be confusing for small business contractors. Without a clear measure of how reliant is too reliant, businesses have to worry that they may be denied an award or even worse, lose one in a post-award protest. In a recent decision, Daniels Building Company, Inc. v. United States, 24-1787, 175 Fed. Cl. 767 (2025), the Court of Federal Claims (COFC) provided potentially helpful insight into what SBA’s Office of Hearings and Appeals (OHA) and the Court of Federal Claims will consider when determining whether a prime contractor is “unusually reliant” on its subcontractor.