From the TIKC Advisory Team · Compliance & Regulatory Alerts
Expressly Unallowable Costs: When Billing the Wrong Expense Comes With a Penalty
Some costs are not just disallowed when you bill them to the government. They carry an automatic penalty on top, sometimes double. Here is what…

Published 2026 | TIKC NewsWire
Not every cost you bill the government is allowed, and most contractors know that. What fewer know is that a special group of costs are not only disallowed, they come with a penalty attached the moment you claim them. These are expressly unallowable costs. Claim one on a cost-reimbursement contract and the government can make you pay it back plus a penalty, and in some cases that penalty doubles. The frustrating part is that these are often ordinary expenses that simply do not belong on a government invoice.
What expressly unallowable means
The cost rules in FAR Part 31 list categories of costs the government will not pay for. Some are judgment calls. But others are named and clearly stated as unallowable, things like interest on borrowing, certain entertainment, alcohol, fines and penalties, and some advertising and lobbying. Because the rule names them plainly, you are expected to know not to bill them. When you do anyway, the law treats it as a cost you had no business claiming, and that is what triggers the penalty.
Why the penalty exists
The penalty is there to make contractors screen their own costs instead of billing everything and letting the auditor sort it out. The government does not want to play referee on costs that are obviously off limits. So it shifts the burden to you: build a system that catches these before they ever hit an invoice. If an auditor finds an expressly unallowable cost in your claim, the penalty is meant to be the consequence of a screen you should have had.
The small-business version of the problem
For a small firm, the owner’s expenses and the company’s expenses often run through the same accounts. A business dinner with wine, interest on a line of credit, a parking ticket on a company car, a sponsorship that is really advertising. None of these are fraud. But if they flow into an indirect cost pool that you then bill against a government contract, you have claimed expressly unallowable costs. The right move is to flag these accounts and pull them out before they ever reach your rates. This is exactly the kind of gap that shows up in a DCAA incurred cost audit.
What to do now
- Learn the named categories. Know the costs FAR calls out plainly as unallowable so you recognize them in your own books.
- Tag unallowable accounts. Set up your accounting so interest, entertainment, alcohol, fines, and similar costs are marked and excluded automatically.
- Screen before you bill. Review indirect cost pools so no expressly unallowable cost ends up in your rates.
- Separate owner and company spending. Keep personal and non-billable expenses out of the pools you charge the government.
- Document your screening. Keep proof that you review and remove these costs, so an auditor sees a working system.
Expressly unallowable costs punish sloppiness, not ambition. You are allowed to spend money on entertainment, interest, and the rest. You just cannot pass those costs to the government, and the penalty is the price of forgetting that. Tag the accounts, screen before you bill, and keep the proof, and these costs stay a line in your own ledger instead of a penalty in an audit finding. Brick by brick.
FAQ
What is the difference between unallowable and expressly unallowable?
Unallowable costs simply will not be reimbursed. Expressly unallowable costs are named plainly in the rules as unallowable, and claiming them can trigger a penalty on top of repayment because you were expected to know better.
What kinds of costs are expressly unallowable?
Common examples include interest on borrowing, alcohol, certain entertainment, fines and penalties, and some advertising and lobbying. The exact treatment is set out in FAR Part 31.
Can the penalty really double?
In some situations, yes. If a cost previously determined to be unallowable is claimed again, the penalty can be larger. That is why fixing the root cause after the first finding matters.
Does this apply to fixed-price work?
The penalty structure is tied to cost-type contracts and the cost principles that govern them. If you bill costs or rates to the government, you need to screen for expressly unallowable costs.
Sources
Federal Acquisition Regulation. (2026). Part 31, Contract Cost Principles and Procedures.
Federal Acquisition Regulation. (2026). 42.709, Penalties for unallowable costs.
This article is general information, not legal advice.
About the Author
TIKC Staff Writer
Team Integrity Knowledge Center is a GovCon education and consulting platform helping small, women-owned, and minority-owned businesses win and keep federal and state contracts with plain-English guidance. Build, grow, scale, brick by brick. Contact
Your next step
Talk it through with a TIKC advisor
Continue reading
Related stories
After a Merger, Are You Still a Small Business? The Recertification Rule
A merger or acquisition can cost you your small-business status overnight, and the rules make you report it. Keep running set-aside work as if nothing…

Technical Data Rights: How to Keep the Government From Giving Your Designs to a Competitor
When you deliver drawings, software, or technical data to the government, the markings you put on them decide who else can use them. Mark them…

Selling Your Company? The Government Has to Agree to Keep Your Contract
You cannot simply hand your federal contract to a buyer the way you would transfer a commercial deal. The government has to approve the transfer…

Earned Value Reporting: When Your Progress Numbers Become a Legal Statement
On big contracts you report how much work you have earned, not just how much you spent. Inflate that number to look on track and…

When the Government Walks Away: Termination for Convenience and Getting Paid
The government can cancel your contract even when you did nothing wrong. It is called termination for convenience, and how much you recover depends almost…

Another Contractor Pays $13 Million for Cybersecurity False Claims
Two defense and aerospace contractors just agreed to pay $13 million to resolve claims that they said their cybersecurity met the rules when it did…

Do Your Share of the Work: The Limitations on Subcontracting Rule
When you win a small-business set-aside, the government expects your small business to actually do the work, not hand most of it to a big…

The Wage Rules for Service Work: The Service Contract Act Explained
If you hold a federal service contract, with janitors, guards, call-center staff, or maintenance crews, the Service Contract Act sets what you must pay them…

Paying the Prevailing Wage: The Davis-Bacon and Certified Payroll Trap
On federal construction, you do not get to decide what to pay your workers. The Davis-Bacon Act sets a prevailing wage, and every week you…

When the Auditor Walks the Floor: Surviving a DCAA Floor Check
One day, with no warning, a government auditor shows up and asks your people what they are working on and what contract they are charging…

Timecard Fraud Just Drove a $184 Million Settlement. Your Hours Are the New Target
In 2026, the fastest road to a giant False Claims Act bill is not a fake product or a phantom vendor. It is the timesheet…




