Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The project is then invoiced to the customer based on the actual costs incurred plus the agreed margin. It is essentially the same as what is known (especially in the U.S.) as a cost-plus contract. This contract form is popular to ensure that a competitive price is obtained, for instance in cases where tender competitions are impractical.
The Final Price of the contract is expressed as follows: Final Price = Actual Cost + Final Fee. Note that if Contractor Share = 1, the contract is a Fixed Price Contract; if Contractor Share = 0, the contract is a cost plus fixed fee (CPFF) contract. [4] For example, assume a CPIF with: Target Cost = 1,000; Target Fee = 100
A cost-plus contract, also termed a cost plus contract, is a contract such that a contractor is paid for all of its allowed expenses, plus additional payment to allow for risk and incentive sharing. [1] Cost-reimbursement contracts contrast with fixed-price contract, in which the contractor is paid a negotiated amount regardless of incurred ...
IDIQ contracts are frequently awarded by various U.S. government agencies, including the General Services Administration (GSA) [6] and Department of Defense. [7] They can be in the form of multi-agency contracts under the Government-Wide Acquisition Contracts (GWAC) system, or they may be government agency-specific contracts. [8]
California’s decision to throw out Medi-Cal contract awards and compromise with health plans has consumer advocates questioning whether state officials will be able to enforce improvements.
This form of contract is intended for building works (including alterations) where the contract is to be administered by an architect and where payment to the builder is to be on the basis of the actual cost of the works plus a fee. This fee may be either a lump sum or a percentage of the cost of the works.
Part 2 – Formation of Contract Chapter 2 – The Agreement, Chapter 3 – Consideration, Chapter 4 – Form, Chapter 5 – Mistake, Chapter 6 – Misrepresentation, Chapter 7 – Duress and Undue Influence; Part 3 – Capacity of Parties
In September 2012, Medifast's subsidiary, Jason Pharmaceuticals, paid a $3.7 million USD civil penalty for false advertising.The Federal Trade Commission and United States Department of Justice said that advertisements for the "Medifast 5 & 1 Plan" low-calorie diet told consumers they could "lose up to 2-5 pounds per week", and that these weight-loss claims lacked a reasonable scientific basis ...