TINA and CAS Thresholds After the FY2026 NDAA: What Changed for Contractors

Alexander Mungov, CPA

Former DCAA Supervisory Auditor · Updated September 10, 2026

What Congress actually changed

The FY2026 National Defense Authorization Act (Public Law 119-60, enacted as S. 1071) was signed on December 18, 2025. Section 1804(c) amended 10 U.S.C. 3702, which decides when you must submit and certify cost or pricing data. Section 1806 amended 41 U.S.C. 1502, the Cost Accounting Standards statute, and directed a higher full coverage threshold.

The two changes run on different tracks. The certified data change is in Title 10, so it applies to defense buying, and it took effect on its own terms for contracts entered into after June 30, 2026. The CAS change is in Title 41, so it’s government-wide, but the figures that trigger full coverage and Disclosure Statements live in the CAS Board’s rules at 48 CFR Part 9903. The Board rewrote those in a final rule published September 1, 2026 (91 FR 56056), effective October 1, 2026. DoD moved first, with a July 30, 2026 class deviation that already applies $100 million to business units holding only DoD contracts.

Is TINA now the “Truthful Cost or Pricing Data Act”?

You’ll see the FY2026 changes described that way, but the NDAA didn’t rename anything. Title 41 has used “Truthful Cost or Pricing Data” as its chapter heading since the 2011 recodification, and the FY2021 NDAA moved the defense version into Title 10, chapter 271, “Truthful Cost or Pricing Data (Truth in Negotiations).” Most practitioners still say TINA. The certificate and the defective pricing remedy work the way they always have. Only the dollar figures moved.

Certified data

How the $10 million threshold works in practice

The test is when the prime contract is entered into, meaning the award date. A proposal submitted in May 2026 for a contract awarded in August 2026 falls under the new threshold. A contract awarded in March 2026 doesn’t, and neither do its later modifications.

• Who it covers. The Title 10 pricing chapter covers DoD, NASA and the Coast Guard (10 U.S.C. 3063). DoD implemented it by class deviation. If you sell to NASA or the Coast Guard, confirm that agency’s implementation before relying on $10 million.
• Civilian agencies. No change. GSA, VA and the rest of the civilian side still use $2.5 million.
• Nontraditional defense contractors. Section 1826 exempts them (10 U.S.C. 3014) from 10 U.S.C. 3702 altogether, along with FAR Part 31 and the six DFARS business systems clauses and 252.242-7005, unless the head of the contracting activity waives it in writing.

Evaluation

What the auditor actually looks at

Here’s how a proposal under the new threshold still gets evaluated, based on the public regulations and how these reviews generally run. The contracting officer starts with price analysis, and with adequate price competition that may be the end of it. The FAR’s order of preference is no additional data, then price-related data, then cost data only as needed. On sole-source work there’s usually nothing to compare against, so expect a cost data request anyway.

On a DoD fixed-price action under $10 million, the reviewer is more likely the buying office’s price analyst than a DCAA auditor. Either way, the review looks a lot like a certified proposal audit without the certificate. Expect them to trace each element back to something real:

• Labor hours. Your basis of estimate: historical actuals from similar jobs, an engineering estimate with a named estimator and method, or parametric factors you can support. “Engineering judgment” with nothing underneath gets questioned.
• Labor rates. Traced to payroll, with escalation you can explain.
• Indirect rates. Tied to a forward pricing rate agreement or proposal, your provisional billing rates, or your latest actuals, with a clear reason for any difference.
• Material and subcontracts. Quotes, evidence of competition, and your own price or cost analysis of significant subcontracts. The prime’s evaluation of its subs gets reviewed like the rest of the proposal.
• Commercial pricing claims. Sales history verified to source documents, and the discounts you normally give.
• Consistency. Whether you estimate the way you accumulate and report actual cost. If you’re CAS covered, even under modified coverage, that’s a CAS 401 question.

On cost-reimbursement competitions, evaluators also run cost realism. They adjust your proposed cost to a probable cost and use that number to evaluate best value. An unrealistically low labor or indirect rate gets adjusted upward, and it can hurt your risk rating along the way.

What changes below the threshold is the aftermath. There’s no certificate of current cost or pricing data, no cutoff date sweep and no post-award defective pricing audit on that contract. The data still has to be accurate. Misstatements in uncertified data carry their own legal exposure, and if that question comes up, we work alongside your counsel.

Regulatory status

A note on the FAR overhaul and DoD deviations

All of this lands in the middle of the Revolutionary FAR Overhaul launched by Executive Order 14275 on April 15, 2025. Rewritten FAR parts are published as model deviation text on acquisition.gov, and agencies adopt them by class deviation until the FAR Council’s formal rules are final.

For DoD, three deviations matter here: 2026-O0048, Rev. 1 (Part 15 and DFARS 215, July 22, 2026), with the $10 million threshold and the nontraditional exemption; 2026-O0006, Rev. 1 (Part 30 and DFARS 230, July 30, 2026), with the $100 million CAS thresholds; and 2026-O0032, Rev. 1 (Part 31 and DFARS 231, August 4, 2026), the cost principles. DoD lists them on its FAR overhaul class deviation index.

Paragraph numbers have moved too: the threshold at FAR 15.403-4 sits at 15.403-3 in the overhaul text, still at $2.5 million for civilian buys. Because the FAR is mid-rewrite and DoD deviations apply in place of the codified text, we check the current text of every part we cite on every engagement.