Jump to content
The Wifcon Forums and Blogs

Search the Community

Showing results for tags '52.232-40'.

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


  • Instructions and Terms of Use
    • Terms Of Use
    • Before You Register, Before You Post
  • Contracting Forum
    • Section 809 Panel
    • Polls
    • For Beginners Only
    • Contracting Workforce
    • Recommended Reading
    • Contract Award Process
    • Contract Pricing Including CAS & Allowable Costs
    • Contract Administration
    • Schedules, GWACS, MACs, IDIQs
    • Subcontracts & Subcontract Management
    • Small Business, Socioeconomic Programs
    • Proposed Law & Regulations; Legal Decisions
  • Federal Contracting: A New Beginning
    • The Competition in Contracting Act


  • The Wifcon Blog
  • Don Mansfield's Blog
  • Bob Antonio's Blog
  • NCMA HQ Blog
  • Professor Ralph Nash's Blog
  • Emptor Cautus' Blog
  • Centre Knowledge Blog
  • Leftbrainpro.com Answer Blog
  • SmallGovCon.com
  • Patterns of Procurement
  • Buy American Application

Product Groups

There are no results to display.


  • Rules & Tools
  • Legal Opinions
  • News

Find results in...

Find results that contain...

Date Created

  • Start


Last Updated

  • Start


Filter by number of...


  • Start





Website URL







Found 1 result

  1. I work for a Large Business who is prime on a government contract. One of our major subcontractors is a small business. I am being asked to request inclusion of 52.232-40 in our contract. I know it's now required for all solicitations/orders, however, I would like feedback on what I believe is a misinterpretation of the clause. My program office feels that inclusion of the clause allows the government to provide accelerated payments to us as the prime that we may in turn accelerate invoice payments to our small business subcontractor. I disagree. I believe the purpose is to notify the Prime that SHOULD the government accelerate its payments that it, must in turn, accelerate payments to the small business. Even if it were not now a required clause, inclusion doesn't help us as Prime at all. It's designed to protect the small business subcontractor as it should. Anyway, read a few memos, M-12-16; M-13-15; and M-14-10 and it looks like the government plans to accelerate payments whenever possible at least through December 2016. With that, I will advise (if you all agree) that M-14-10 helps to improve the likelihood that we as Prime are paid within 15 days; there is no clause that would guarantee accelerated payment to us under these circumstances; and 52.232-40 is included in the contract under the Christian Doctrine and therefore our subcontractor should rest assured that they are protected,
  • Create New...