FAR 3.803—Exceptions.
Plain-English Summary
FAR 3.803 explains the exceptions to the general prohibition in FAR 3.802(a) on certain contingent-fee or influence-related arrangements in connection with covered Federal actions. It identifies when payments to a person’s own officers or employees, as well as payments to outside consultants and other nonemployees, may be allowed for agency and legislative liaison, professional and technical services, and related pre-award or negotiation activities. The section also clarifies what kinds of communications are permitted, including responses to agency or congressional requests, non-solicitation discussions about product capabilities and application, pre-solicitation information needed for an informed agency decision, technical discussions on unsolicited proposals, and capability presentations under the Small Business Act. It further defines “professional and technical services” as advice and analysis directly applying a professional discipline, and it draws a sharp line between allowable expert advice and unallowable influence communications. Finally, it limits the exception to only those communications and services expressly authorized and states that the disclosure rules in FAR 3.802(b) do not apply to reasonable compensation paid to regularly employed officers or employees. In practice, this section tells contractors and contracting personnel when advocacy, liaison, and expert support are permissible and when they cross into prohibited influence activity.
Key Rules
Own-employee liaison allowed
A contractor may pay reasonable compensation to its own officers or employees for agency and legislative liaison activities that are not directly related to a covered Federal action. This includes providing information specifically requested by an agency or Congress at any time, as well as certain pre-solicitation discussions and capability presentations.
Pre-solicitation communications limited
Permitted discussions with an agency must not relate to a specific solicitation for a covered Federal action. They may cover product qualities, service capabilities, terms of sale, application or adaptation of products, or information needed before formal solicitation so the agency can make an informed decision.
Unsolicited proposal support allowed
Technical discussions about preparing an unsolicited proposal are allowed before the proposal is officially submitted. The exception is narrow and applies only to preparatory technical communications, not to broader efforts to influence the agency.
Professional and technical services exception
Reasonable compensation may be paid for professional or technical services rendered directly in preparing, submitting, or negotiating a bid, proposal, or application, or in meeting legal or regulatory requirements for receiving the award. This applies to both employees and nonemployees such as consultants and trade associations.
Expert advice must be direct
Professional and technical services must consist of advice and analysis that directly apply a professional or technical discipline. A lawyer drafting legal portions of a proposal or an engineer advising on equipment performance in negotiation may qualify, but general advocacy or influence communications do not.
Influence communications remain barred
A professional or technical person cannot use their expertise as a cover for lobbying or advocacy. Communications intended to influence are not allowable unless they are directly and solely tied to the professional or technical preparation, submission, or negotiation of the covered action.
Legal and award-document requirements included
Requirements imposed by law or regulation, and any other requirements stated in the actual award documents, are treated as conditions for receiving the covered Federal action. Services provided to meet those requirements can fall within the exception if they otherwise meet the rule.
Only expressly authorized conduct permitted
Paragraph (b) makes clear that only the communications and services specifically listed in paragraph (a) are allowed. Anything outside those express exceptions remains subject to the general prohibition in FAR 3.802(a).
Disclosure rule narrowed for employees
The disclosure requirements in FAR 3.802(b) do not apply to reasonable compensation paid to regularly employed officers or employees. This reduces reporting burden for ordinary employee compensation, but it does not expand what conduct is permissible.
Responsibilities
Contractor
Ensure that any liaison, advocacy, proposal support, or technical assistance fits squarely within one of the listed exceptions. The contractor must distinguish between allowable expert services and prohibited influence activity, and must avoid using consultants, trade associations, or employees to do anything beyond what paragraph (a) expressly permits.
Officers and employees of the contractor
Limit their activities to the permitted categories when being compensated for work connected to a covered Federal action. They may provide requested information, technical advice, or proposal-related support, but they may not engage in general lobbying or advocacy disguised as professional services.
Consultants and trade associations
Provide only reasonable, directly related professional or technical services when paid for proposal preparation, submission, negotiation, or legal/regulatory compliance. They must not be used as a vehicle for impermissible influence communications.
Contracting Officer / Agency
Recognize that certain pre-solicitation communications, capability presentations, and requested information exchanges are permitted, and evaluate contractor communications in light of the narrow exceptions. The agency should not treat authorized expert or informational exchanges as prohibited conduct when they fall within the rule.
Agency and Congress
May request information from a contractor at any time, and contractors may respond to those requests under the exception. Requests and responses should remain focused on the information sought and not become a channel for improper influence.
Practical Implications
Contractors can lawfully use employees and outside experts to help prepare proposals, but only when the work is directly tied to the covered action and is truly professional, technical, or liaison support.
The biggest compliance risk is mixing advocacy with expertise: a lawyer, engineer, or consultant who starts lobbying for one proposal over another may lose the protection of the exception.
Pre-solicitation conversations are allowed only if they are not tied to a specific solicitation; once the discussion becomes solicitation-specific, the safe harbor narrows sharply.
Reasonableness of compensation matters. Even if the activity is allowed, excessive or disguised payments can create compliance problems.
The rule is narrow by design: if a communication or service is not expressly listed in paragraph (a), it should be treated as prohibited unless another authority clearly applies.
Official Regulatory Text
(a) The prohibition of paragraph 3.802 (a) does not apply under the following conditions: (1) Agency and legislative liaison by own employees . (i) Payment of reasonable compensation made to an officer or employee of a person requesting or receiving a covered Federal action if the payment is for agency and legislative liaison activities not directly related to a covered Federal action. For purposes of this paragraph, providing any information specifically requested by an agency or Congress is permitted at any time. (ii) Participating with an agency in discussions that are not related to a specific solicitation for any covered Federal action, but that concern- (A) The qualities and characteristics (including individual demonstrations) of the person’s products or services, conditions or terms of sale, and service capabilities; or (B) The application or adaptation of the person’s products or services for an agency’s use. (iii) Providing prior to formal solicitation of any covered Federal action any information not specifically requested but necessary for an agency to make an informed decision about initiation of a covered Federal action. (iv) Participating in technical discussions regarding the preparation of an unsolicited proposal prior to its official submission. (v) Making capability presentations prior to formal solicitation of any covered Federal action when seeking an award from an agency pursuant to the provisions of the Small Business Act, as amended by Pub. L. 95-507, and subsequent amendments. (2) Professional and technical services. (i) Payment of reasonable compensation made to an officer or employee of a person requesting or receiving a covered Federal action, if payment is for professional or technical services rendered directly in the preparation, submission, or negotiation of any bid, proposal, or application for that Federal action or for meeting requirements imposed by or pursuant to law as a condition for receiving that Federal action; (ii) Any reasonable payment to a person, other than an officer or employee of a person requesting or receiving a covered Federal action, if the payment is for professional or technical services rendered directly in the preparation, submission, or negotiation of any bid, proposal, or application for that Federal action, or for meeting requirements imposed by or pursuant to law as a condition for receiving that Federal action. Persons other than officers or employees of a person requesting or receiving a covered Federal action include consultants and trade associations. (iii) As used in paragraph (a)(2) of this section "professional and technical services" are limited to advice and analysis directly applying any professional or technical discipline. For example, drafting of a legal document accompanying a bid or proposal by a lawyer is allowable. Similarly, technical advice provided by an engineer on the performance or operational capability of a piece of equipment rendered directly in the negotiation of a contract is allowable. However, communications with the intent to influence made by a professional or a technical person are not allowable under this section unless they provide advice and analysis directly applying their professional or technical expertise and unless the advice or analysis is rendered directly and solely in the preparation, submission or negotiation of a covered Federal action. Thus, for example, communications with the intent to influence made by a lawyer that do not provide legal advice or analysis directly and solely related to the legal aspects of his or her client’s proposal, but generally advocate one proposal over another, are not allowable under this section because the lawyer is not providing professional legal services. Similarly, communications with the intent to influence made by an engineer providing an engineering analysis prior to the preparation or submission of a bid or proposal are not allowable under this section since the engineer is providing technical services but not directly in the preparation, submission or negotiation of a covered Federal action. (iv) Requirements imposed by or pursuant to law as a condition for receiving a covered Federal award include those required by law or regulation and any other requirements in the actual award documents. (b) Only those communications and services expressly authorized by paragraph (a) of this section are permitted. (c) The disclosure requirements of paragraph 3.802 (b) do not apply with respect to payments of reasonable compensation made to regularly employed officers or employees of a person.