Jump to content


Photo

CPFF Subcontracts Arrangement and Fixed Fee at the Prime Leve


  • Please log in to reply
4 replies to this topic

#1 LM_ABITWT

LM_ABITWT

    Copper Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 44 posts

Posted 26 March 2012 - 01:40 PM

In a CPFF arrangement, my organization has always viewed both cost and fee invoiced by our subcontractors as a cost to us (the prime) therefore we do not segregate a subcontractor's cost and fee in our billings to the customer. The fixed fee stipulated in our prime contract is the fee that is payable to us only.

Does this approach seem correct and consistent with how other firms handle CPFF Subcontracts?

This topic came up in conversation with one of our customers and they objected to this concept, stating a contractor was not allowed to apply fee on fee. I checked our prime contract and I could not find any language that supported our customer's position.

How do I know if I'm on solid footing here?

Thanks!

#2 Retreadfed

Retreadfed

    Gold Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 830 posts

Posted 26 March 2012 - 02:34 PM

In a CPFF arrangement, my organization has always viewed both cost and fee invoiced by our subcontractors as a cost to us (the prime) therefore we do not segregate a subcontractor's cost and fee in our billings to the customer. The fixed fee stipulated in our prime contract is the fee that is payable to us only.

Does this approach seem correct and consistent with how other firms handle CPFF Subcontracts?

This topic came up in conversation with one of our customers and they objected to this concept, stating a contractor was not allowed to apply fee on fee. I checked our prime contract and I could not find any language that supported our customer's position.

How do I know if I'm on solid footing here?

Thanks!


The rental cost principle and material cost principle generally prohibit a contractor from charging a fee or profit on rentals or material obtained from a party under common control with the prime contractor. There is no other prohibition on fee on fee in the FAR. Therefore you can do this unless there is a provision in your contract limiting fee on fee in other circumstances.

#3 here_2_help

here_2_help

    Gold Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 866 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:San Diego, CA
  • Interests:Reading, writing, wine-drinking, watching my two boys grow up. Rock-and-roll, jazz, stage plays and musicals. TV and films, but not video games. Philosophy, politics and religion, but not political or religious organizations.

Posted 26 March 2012 - 02:39 PM

Retreadfed is correct. It's not fee on fee because, as you posted, the subK's fee is a cost to you. The fee you negotiate is for the risks and duties associated with managing the subK, which has nothing to do with fee that the subK negotiates with you.

Hope this helps.

#4 LM_ABITWT

LM_ABITWT

    Copper Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 44 posts

Posted 26 March 2012 - 06:52 PM

I appreciate the quick response! Thanks very much!

#5 Cajuncharlie

Cajuncharlie

    Bronze Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 229 posts

Posted 27 March 2012 - 06:25 AM

See FAR 52.215-23, Limitations on Pass-Through Charges.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users