I am a Contract Administrator and we have 2 subcontracts under customers who have a Prime with the Government. They did not provide us with a Resale Certificate in either instance. The first contract is subject to FAR 52.229-3. The other contract was actually an ATP which never was finalized. Should the customer under the Prime have provided us with a Resale Certificate in both cases so we dont charge them tax?

Depends upon what you are selling and to whom. Are you saying that you are a supplier to customers who are prime contractors on government contracts and are you referring to sales tax? I think so.

 

Edited February 19, 20251 yr by joel hoffman
Rephrased question

What is an ATP? “Available to Promise”?

1 hour ago, OuterSpace said:

Should the customer under the Prime have provided us with a Resale Certificate in both cases so we dont charge them tax?

You have two relationiships with two separate primes, correct?  One is a subcontract (I will call it subcontract) and the other was a commitment to provide something when you received the Authority to Proceed (ATP, which I will call ATP), correct?  The subcontract has 52.229-3 in it and the ATP made no reference to the clause correct?

If all yes then this is the way I see it to try to sort out the confusion of your post into something logical.

With the reminder that a subcontractor has no privity of contract with the Government your questions are best asked of the two primes.  Why?  Because there is no way to understand what the prime did in pricing the prime contract with regard to taxes and what, if any, exemptions might have been requested by the prime and if they were granted.  Also if the prime simply passed down 52.229-3 in the subcontract then the sub pricing too should have included all taxes and if the sub wanted to possibly get an exemption that exemption would have be sought through the prime. 

This said I am making the conclusion that you are asking because it appears you are asking with regard excise tax.   If this is true then I would be paying attention to paragrpahs (c) through (d) and advising the prime as applicable for the subcontract.   For the ATP who knows but I would probably be taking the same route as it seems by your original post all are considering the ATP to be an implied in fact contract.   The question being for the ATP is 52.229-3 considered to be a part of the the ATP?

I hope this helps, adds some clarity and gets you to the right place for an answer.