Revolutionary FAR Overhaul Guide – Part 1

The first wave of the FAR overhaul, focusing on FAR Part 1, eliminates foundational principles like “best value procurement” and alters FAR compliance by redefining the contracting officer’s role and encouraging FAR deviations. This analysis breaks down the proposed FAR Part 1 changes to help government contractors navigate the new landscape of federal procurement and prepare for what’s next. GovSpring is available to help contractors and companies understand how the FAR rewrite may impact their current and future contracts. Click here to schedule a consultation or fill out our online contact form to be contacted by our Managing Attorney.

On April 15, 2025, President Trump issued Executive Order (“EO”) 14275, titled Restoring Common Sense To Federal Procurement. As part of this EO, the Trump Administration directed the Federal Acquisition Regulatory Council (“FAR Council”), agency heads, and other senior procurement officials to amend the Federal Acquisition Regulation (“FAR”) within 180-days. The FAR revision will keep provisions that satisfy any of the following conditions:

• Provisions which are required by statute;
• Provisions “otherwise necessary to support simplicity and usability;”
• Provisions that strengthen the efficacy of the procurement system; and
• Provisions protecting economic or national security interests

By May 2, 2025, the first of the proposed revisions to the FAR under President Trump’s mandate were released. This article will compare the proposed alterations to FAR Part 1 against the existing FAR Part 1, and, using this comparison, examine what can be expected in future revisions to the remaining subparts under the FAR.

Description of Changes to FAR Part 1

Structural Changes

In its current form, the proposed FAR Part 1 represents a significant reduction in content, with at least 70% of the content contained in the existing FAR Part 1 eliminated as part of the overhaul. Only five subparts survived the cut, most of which now exist in a condensed, succinct format. One portion of the current FAR Part 1—FAR Subpart 1.5, titled Agency and Public Participation—was removed from the overhauled version.

Outside of the format of the potential FAR Part 1, the structural role a contracting officer (“CO”) serves in the procurement process changes under the revision. In the current version of FAR Part 1, CO’s are tasked with ensuring all necessary tasks for performance to ensure “effective contracting,” contracting compliance, and protecting the interests of the U.S. The extensiveness of their duties also provides wide latitude to exercise appropriate actions based on their mandate. The revision of FAR Part 1 substantively cuts down on this language and casts the CO’s role as a monitor to ensure compliance with the law, the contract terms, and requesting and considering advice from subject matter experts as needed.

Reframing the FAR’s Core Tenets

Arguably the most notorious prospective change under the new FAR Part 1 is the elimination of the FAR’s Guiding Principles currently located in FAR 1.102. EO 14275 cites the introductory sentence of FAR 1.102, which states “[t]he vision for the Federal Acquisition System is to deliver on a timely basis the best value product or service to the customer, while maintaining the public’s trust and fulfilling public policy objectives.” The principles embedded in this statement (e.g., best value, public policy objectives) have provided the bedrock for the development of the federal procurement system since the FAR’s inception over 40 years ago.

The revised FAR 1.102 in the proposed overhaul fails to emphasize or mention the arguable tenets of the FAR. Instead, other concepts that correspond to the Trump Administration’s previously issued EO’s and policy stances exist in the place of references to “best value” and “public policy.” These concepts include an explicit preference for commercial products and services, encouragement for innovation and “effective use of taxpayer dollars,” and focusing on “risk management” rather than eliminating all forms of risk in procurement.

Another significant shift in the proposed FAR Part 1 overhaul involves deviations from the FAR itself. Currently, deviations—individual or class—are addressed in a limited and procedural way, with minimal focus on fostering flexibility or innovation. While the original FAR Part 1.4 does provide the authority and process to grant deviations, it does so conservatively, reinforcing the idea that deviations are exceptions to be carefully controlled rather than tools for experimentation or adaptation. This has traditionally reinforced a culture of risk aversion within federal procurement, where deviation was a last resort rather than a strategic choice.

In contrast, the revised FAR Part 1 takes a markedly different tone and structure. Now located in Subpart 1.3, deviations are not only restructured but actively encouraged when they promote “economy, efficiency, or innovation.” The overhaul establishes a more formal and rapid process for approving class deviations, including specific timelines and a direct communication pipeline with the FAR Council. This reimagining of deviation policy reflects a broader philosophical shift: from a risk-avoidance model to a dynamic system that recognizes deviation as a legitimate and even desirable pathway for modernizing acquisition practices.

Notable Cuts

In addition, the revised FAR removes the following interpretive guidance that is often cited; namely, that the procurement Team should assume any “strategy or [procurement] practice” that is “not specifically addressed . . . nor prohibited by law” is permitted. They also cut subsection 1.105-2, which explains how to read parts, subparts, sections, and subsections. Presumably, some of these cuts may find their way into the interpretive guidance that will be assembled in “buying guides” discussed in OMB Memo M-25-26. Notably, the section titled “FAR conventions” at 1.108 remains, which provides guidance for the application of definitions, allows for the delegation of authority, and governs the application of FAR changes to solicitations and contracts.

The decision to cut FAR 1.501-2 Opportunity for public comments has alarmed some commentators. For background, under 41 U.S.C. § 1707, any procurement policies or regulation cannot take effect until 60 days after “it is published for public comment in the Federal Register.” The statute states the requirement as follows:

[T]he head of the agency shall have published in the Federal Register a notice of the proposed procurement policy, regulation, procedure, or form and provide for a public comment period for receiving and considering the views of all interested parties on the proposal. The length of the comment period may not be less than 30 days.

Since the process of changing the FAR itself appears to not be complying with this statute, it is unclear if FAR 1.501-2 will appear in another section of the FAR or will be cut entirely. If statutory comment periods are cut, the government may risk litigation from adversely-affected contractors.

New Additions

One of most notable additions to the prospective FAR Part 1 is a regulatory sunset provision under FAR 1.109. Under this provision, all regulations that are not required by statute expire four years after a provision’s effective date if the FAR Council failed to renew the provision in question. This proposed addition neatly aligns with EO 14192, which notably creating the “ten-for-one” rule, requiring all federal agencies to identify at least 10 existing regulations for elimination when proposing a new one.

FAR Subpart 1.2, titled Agency Acquisition Regulations, under the proposed FAR rewrite differs from the original FAR by requiring agencies to ensure their regulations do not conflict with the FAR, or repeat, paraphrase, or restate material in the FAR or other acquisition regulations. Agency heads are also not required to publish notices in the Federal Register that implement or supplement higher level issuances under the proposed alteration, nor publish internal agency guidance for comments. EO 14192’s principles of reducing administrative burdens likely influenced the FAR Council’s development of this section.

The proposed revisions to FAR Part 1 as part of the FAR overhaul undoubtedly correlate with the Trump Administration’s output on federal procurement in various avenues. It is likely this overhaul will signal an unwavering commitment to double down on clear preferences (e.g., innovation, risk-favorable environment, commercial preference) at the expense of old values.