Christopher Deluzio (D-PA)
Defense Industry Pricing Transparency Act
A Democratic bill with no cosponsors
Last activity — Referred to the House Committee on Armed Services.
In committee
Introduced and handed to a committee in the chamber it started in.
The committee holds it, and most bills are never heard from again. A hearing or a committee vote would be news; silence is the usual outcome, and it kills the bill without anyone voting against it.
Its path through Congress
- Introduced
- In Committee
What this bill would do
The Defense Industry Pricing Transparency Act amends title 10 of the United States Code. It requires offerors to report price increases for covered contracts to the relevant contracting officer within 30 days of becoming aware of the increase. Reporting is triggered when prices reach specific percentages above bid prices or previous government payment amounts. Covered contracts are those awarded using procedures other than competitive procedures. Offerors who fail to comply will have their information listed in the Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System.
Yes· 3 of 6
- Scored +7
Does this make what the government does easier for the public to see?
Directly requires transparency in pricing for non-competitive defense contracts.
- Scored +5
Does this make the government pay for what it commits to?
Provides better oversight and accountability for non-competitive defense spending.
- Scored +3
Does this reduce what the federal government spends?
Reporting price spikes allows the government to better negotiate or avoid overpriced non-competitive contracts.
The opposite
- Scored -3
Would business owners be better off under this?
Increases administrative burden and reporting requirements for defense contractors.
- Scored -2
Would billionaires be better off under this?
Potential reduction in profits for large defense contractors due to increased price scrutiny.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Price Monitoring: The bill requires reports when prices increase by 25 percent over the bid price or the previous year's price, or 50 percent over prices from five years prior (Sec. 2(a)). This provides oversight on costs for products and services in covered contracts.
-
Accountability for Noncompliance: Offerors who fail to report price increases will be identified in the Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (Sec. 2(b)). This ensures there is a record of which offerors are not following reporting rules.
Potential Negative Impacts for People
- Administrative Burden: Offerors must submit reports to contracting officers within 30 days of becoming aware of specific price increases (Sec. 2(a)). This creates a mandatory reporting requirement for these entities.
Groups and Interests Ranking
Every group the model scored this bill for, from -10 to +10. Tap or hover a score for the reason it gave.
- Economy And Finance
- Does this make the government pay for what it commits to? — Provides better oversight and accountability for non-competitive defense spending. Does this reduce what the federal government spends? — Reporting price spikes allows the government to better negotiate or avoid overpriced non-competitive contracts. Does this reduce what the federal government owes? — Increased price transparency in defense contracting may reduce government overspending and waste.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this make what the government does easier for the public to see? — Directly requires transparency in pricing for non-competitive defense contracts. Does this give the federal government more power? — Increases the oversight and reporting requirements imposed by the federal government on contractors.
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Would business owners be better off under this? — Increases administrative burden and reporting requirements for defense contractors. Would billionaires be better off under this? — Potential reduction in profits for large defense contractors due to increased price scrutiny.
- National Security And Foreign Policy
- Does this reduce what is spent on the military? — Increased transparency may curb excessive price hikes in non-competitive defense contracts.
- 9/8/2025
- Referred to the House Committee on Armed Services.
- Introduced in House
2 bills Congress.gov lists as related to this one — companions in the other chamber, earlier versions, and bills this one absorbed or was folded into.