As we have hinted at (and even mentioned) in some of our more recent client alerts, the proverbial other shoe has now dropped. In the April 15, 2025, Executive Order entitled "Restoring Common Sense to Federal Procurement" (the EO), the President has determined that the Federal Acquisition Regulations (FAR) codified at Title 48 of the Code of Federal Regulations, has "swelled to more than 2000 pages of regulations, evolving into an excessive and overcomplicated regulatory framework and resulting in onerous bureaucracy." EO §1. Citing various studies, mostly those produced for the U.S. Senate, the EO finds that "…the FAR is a barrier to, rather than a prudent vehicle for, doing business with the Federal Government. Its harmful effects permeate various items paid for by American taxpayers, from commercial products…to major defense weapons systems." Id. The EO goes on to conclude that "[f]ortunately, its inadequacies are self-inflicted and can be remedied through a comprehensive reform of the FAR." Id.

Citing Executive Order No. 14192, January 31, 2025,¹ which directed deregulation, the current EO directs that:

It is the policy of the United States to create the most agile, effective, and efficient procurement system possible. Removing undue barriers, such as unnecessary regulations, while simultaneously allowing for the expansion of the national and defense industrial bases is paramount. Accordingly, the FAR should contain only provisions required by statute or essential to sound procurement, and any FAR provisions that do not advance these objectives should be removed. EO §2.

Towards this end and goal, the Administrator of the Office of Federal Public Procurement Policy (OFPP) is directed to work with the FAR Council (consisting of the DOD, NASA, and GSA); agency heads, and senior acquisition/procurement personnel, to "take appropriate actions to amend the FAR to ensure that it contains only provisions that are required by statute or that are otherwise necessary to support simplicity and usability, strengthen the efficacy of the procurement system, or protect economic or nation security interests." EO §4 (emphasis added).

Among other instructions, the EO directs the Director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), within 20 days of the EO's date, to issue a memorandum to agencies providing guidance on implementing the EO. This memo shall be a lynchpin to seeing how the policies and instructions of the EO will be pursued and should shed significant light on this effort. As the reader may know, the FAR consists not only of the main or primary FAR provisions but also contains thousands of pages of agency-specific supplements to the FAR. For example, the Department of Defense has its supplement (the DFARS), as does the Army, Navy, Corps of Engineers, Air Force, etc.; so does the GSA, USAID/Department of State, and so on. As a result, Section 5 of the EO directs that the FAR Supplements also be included in the implementation of this EO. The OFPP memo referenced above shall also include guidance as to how the FAR Supplements are to be addressed and direct "the appropriate agency and its subordinate agencies to adhere to the ten-for-one requirement described in Executive Order 14192." EO §5(c). The OFPP Administrator and FAR Council shall also issue FAR deviations and interim guidance documents until the final rules on FAR reformation are published (likely not for many months). 

Another instruction in the EO is called the regulatory sunset. EO §6. As part of the amendment of the FAR, considerations are to be made to:

1. Identify all FAR provisions not mandated by statute that are to remain;
2. Consider amendment of the FAR to state that any such non-mandatory but remaining provisions shall "…expire four years after the effective date of the final rule promulgated…" under the revised FAR unless otherwise renewed by the FAR Council and
3. Consider whether new FAR Provisions not mandated by statute that are promulgated after the new FAR is published, should include a provision that it expires four years after its effective date unless the FAR Council renews it. 

ANALYSIS

Having worked in the Government contracts space for upwards of 30 years each, the authors are in favor of a reformation of the FAR. The volume of the existing FAR is massive and often neither consistent nor practical nor business friendly. Many of these provisions are in direct contrast to more traditional business practices, although over the course of the past 25 years or so, some more common practices, such as FAR Part 15 negotiated procurements (versus the more traditional FAR Part 14 sealed bidding) and FAR Part 12 commercial item procurements have come to play a major role in most modern public procurement. 

Some items, such as construction bonds required under The Miller Act, the Davis-Bacon and Service Contract Act, and the regulations promulgated thereunder (noting that some of the relevant regulations are under the Department of Labor's regulations outside the FAR), are less likely to be impacted by this effort. Likewise, those regulations relating to business ethics and the False Claims Act will likely remain in some form, whether mandated by statute or not. The real problem is not the reformation of the FAR but the time it will take to effectuate this. Not only does the Government have to review the entire FAR and all of its Supplements to determine what are mandated by law and which are not, but then, of those not mandated, which are to remain and why? Then, under the Administrative Procedures Act, the rulemaking of effectively republishing the entire FAR, seeking public commentary, and subsequently wading through that volume of information and reaching a final published rulemaking with a new FAR is something that will take significant time. While this process is ongoing, contractors should expect the issuance of a slew of interim rules, some of which may bear little to no resemblance to the public, and comment on final versions of these rules.

Other items are totally unaffected by the EO as they fall outside the FAR. For example, grant agreements are not in the FAR but rather are covered by regulations found at 2 CFR, published by the OMB. At least facially, this EO does nothing on that front. In reality, however, logic dictates that it may only be a matter of time before some of the revisions to the FAR find their way to non-contractual vehicles, such as grant agreements. That more practical effect will undoubtedly incorporate the intention behind this and other EOs, albeit in a less frontal assault. 

As Government contracts attorneys, we are excited about what this process and the resulting revised FAR may look like, but getting there will be a journey, possibly learning an entirely new set of regulations and the appurtenant pitfalls in implementing and enforcing these new regulations presents any number of concerns for any Government contractor. The future of these issues is a mystery as to its practical implementation, but also bright assuming that a more streamlined, practical, and business-forward set of regulations ultimately results from this effort. 

¹ See our previous Client Alert: Enter DOGE: Trump Executive Order Formalizes DOGE and Directs Agencies on Next Cost Cutting Steps. (March 3, 2025)