With Donald Trump returning to the presidency, the federal procurement landscape may experience significant shifts. In an interview with “Federal News Network”, procurement attorney Eric Crusius outlined several key areas where changes could occur, including the use of executive orders, cybersecurity policies, and adjustments to procurement regulations. His insights shed light on what contractors might expect in the coming years.

One potential hallmark of a Trump administration would be the strategic use of executive orders to bypass traditional rulemaking processes. As Crusius explained to Tom Temin on “The Federal Drive”, Trump’s previous administration occasionally issued orders requiring immediate implementation in procurement contracts, followed by later rulemaking. This method could resurface, allowing rapid policy changes but also inviting legal challenges. Whether such challenges materialize depends on the subject matter and its perceived impact on contractors' operations and profits.

Cybersecurity is expected to remain a key focus, building on Trump’s earlier efforts to address foreign threats like intellectual property theft by China. Crusius noted that the Cybersecurity Maturity Model Certification (CMMC), first introduced under Trump, may see broader application across federal agencies. This aligns with a continued emphasis on protecting critical infrastructure and sensitive data through stringent regulatory measures. Contractors should prepare for enhanced compliance requirements as cybersecurity remains a bipartisan priority.

Another anticipated area of continuity is the push for onshoring and Buy American policies. Crusius emphasized that both Trump and Biden administrations strongly support domestic manufacturing and supply chain security. Trump’s renewed focus might include scrutinizing contractors’ outsourcing practices, potentially limiting the use of foreign subcontractors. While questions remain about implementation, this approach underscores the administration’s commitment to fostering domestic industry.

Small business contracting could also face notable changes. Crusius highlighted the potential implications of recent Supreme Court rulings on affirmative action, which could influence race- or gender-based preferences in federal set-aside programs. If such interpretations extend to procurement, contractors may need to adjust to a shifting landscape for small business eligibility and competition. These changes could impact how small businesses, particularly those owned by women and minorities, participate in federal contracting.

Environmental and labor regulations are likely to experience rollbacks. Crusius pointed to Trump’s history of undoing socio-environmental mandates in contracting, such as green procurement requirements and labor-related policies. Long-standing labor practices, including worker non-displacement rules, may once again oscillate depending on administrative priorities, reflecting a broader trend of regulatory reversals.

Administrative structures like the Office of Federal Procurement Policy (OFPP) and the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) may also see shifts under Trump. Crusius suggested that OIRA’s role in reviewing regulations could expand, with a focus on minimizing regulatory costs for contractors. While this may streamline rulemaking, it could also slow critical updates due to resource constraints. Trump might also reinstate measures requiring significant guidance documents to undergo public notice and comment, which would provide contractors with greater transparency and predictability.

In his discussion with Temin, Crusius observed that these potential changes align with strategies seen during Trump’s previous term. Contractors familiar with the earlier administration’s priorities may have an advantage in adapting to these shifts. However, the evolving regulatory landscape underscores the importance of staying informed and proactive.

The above insights are based on Eric Crusius's remarks during an interview with Tom Temin on “Federal News Network’s” “The Federal Drive”. For more detailed information, visit the original article on the “Federal News Network” website.

This blog post is intended for informational purposes only and does not guarantee accuracy or constitute legal advice.