🇩🇪Germany

Indirekte Kostenallokationsfehler und Überverrechnung bei Rüstungsaufträgen

3 verified sources

Definition

Under CAS 401-420, contractors must allocate indirect costs (overhead, G&A, facilities, management) using consistent, documented allocation bases. Manual allocation processes, spreadsheet-based cost pools, or ad-hoc basis changes result in either under-allocation (profit loss on government contracts) or over-allocation (disallowed costs identified in DCAA audits, requiring refunds and penalty adjustments).

Key Findings

  • Financial Impact: 2–5% of contract value in allocation errors; for €10M contract: €200,000–€500,000 exposure. DCAA audit disallowances typically 3–7% of questioned costs; FAR allows recovery plus interest (typically 6% annually).
  • Frequency: Per cost accounting period (monthly/quarterly); identified in annual or triennial DCAA audits
  • Root Cause: Manual cost pool maintenance, lack of real-time labor tracking, allocation base changes not synchronized with contract modifications, German accounting platforms (DATEV, SAP) not configured for multi-segment CAS cost flows, insufficient cost segregation between G&A, overhead, and direct material/labor

Why This Matters

This pain point represents a significant opportunity for B2B solutions targeting Defense and Space Manufacturing.

Affected Stakeholders

Cost Accountant, Project Controller, Procurement Manager (for cost-plus-fee agreements), Finance Manager

Deep Analysis (Premium)

Financial Impact

Financial data and detailed analysis available with full access. Unlock to see exact figures, evidence sources, and actionable insights.

Unlock to reveal

Current Workarounds

Financial data and detailed analysis available with full access. Unlock to see exact figures, evidence sources, and actionable insights.

Unlock to reveal

Get Solutions for This Problem

Full report with actionable solutions

$99$39
  • Solutions for this specific pain
  • Solutions for all 15 industry pains
  • Where to find first clients
  • Pricing & launch costs
Get Solutions Report

Methodology & Sources

Data collected via OSINT from regulatory filings, industry audits, and verified case studies.

Evidence Sources:

Related Business Risks

CAS-Compliance-Verstöße und Kontraktstrafen

€50,000–€150,000 per CAS audit engagement; €100,000–€500,000 per contract price adjustment (typical 2–8% of contract value); 200–400 manual hours annually per contract for compliance documentation.

Übermäßige Compliance- und Audit-Kosten bei U.S.-Verträgen

€300,000–€800,000 annually: €150,000–€300,000 external audit costs; €100,000–€200,000 internal labor (20 hrs/month × 12 months × €75/hr blended rate); €50,000–€300,000 delayed contract payment interest/working capital cost.

Unzureichende Kostenvisibilität in U.S.-Vertragsmanagement

€500,000–€3,000,000+ annually: €100,000–€500,000 external consulting fees per major contract; 5–15% typical margin erosion on CAS-covered contracts (€250,000–€2,500,000 per contract in lost profit); 100–300 hours annually in rework due to bid model errors.

CAS-Nichtkonformität und Vertragsstrafen bei Rüstungsaufträgen

Contract termination risk (loss of 100% revenue stream); estimated audit remediation: €50,000–€200,000+ per contract; penalty fines under FAR 48 CFR Part 31; potential suspension from future US contracts

Verzögerte Vertragsabrechnung durch CAS Disclosure und Audit Compliance

Estimated 60–180 day payment delay on initial contract value; for €5M contract at 5% cost of capital: €41,667–€125,000 working capital cost; accounts receivable aging increases by 45–90 days

Fehlentscheidungen bei Angeboten durch unzureichende CAS-Kostentransparenz

Bid pricing errors: 2–8% margin loss on full contract value; for €20M contract: €400,000–€1,600,000 margin loss. Post-award disallowances: 3–7% of total contract value in questioned costs requiring refund or credit against future invoices.

Request Deep Analysis

🇩🇪 Be first to access this market's intelligence