From the TIKC Advisory Team · Federal Contracting News
Foreign Influence Screening Just Went Mainstream: The New FOCI Rule for Unclassified Contracts
A proposed DoD rule would extend foreign ownership, control, or influence (FOCI) disclosure and mitigation to unclassified contracts over $5M — reaching ~37,700 firms.

Published September 14, 2026 | TIKC NewsWire
A conflict of interest can be a relationship, a financial stake — or a foreign one. On May 7, 2026, the Department of Defense published a long-awaited proposed rule (DFARS Case 2021-D011) that would extend Foreign Ownership, Control, or Influence (FOCI) disclosure and mitigation requirements to unclassified defense contracts — not just classified ones. DoD estimates it would reach roughly 37,700 contractors and subcontractors that have never faced FOCI scrutiny before.
What Would Change
Historically, FOCI review applied only to contractors with facility clearances and access to classified information. The proposed rule — implementing Section 847 of the FY2020 NDAA — would apply to DoD contracts and subcontracts at any tier valued over $5 million, exempting commercial products and services unless a senior DoD official flags a national-security risk. Covered firms would complete Standard Form (SF) 328, disclose beneficial ownership and foreign-interest information to the Defense Counterintelligence and Security Agency (DCSA) via the National Industrial Security System (NISS), and mitigate any FOCI before award.
The Part That Will Slow Awards
Here’s the teeth: contracting officers would be prohibited from awarding, modifying, or extending a covered contract unless the contractor has an “eligible” status in NISS — meaning DCSA has reviewed the disclosures and determined that FOCI either doesn’t exist or has been mitigated. In practice, FOCI clearance becomes a prerequisite to award, which means new pre-award timelines and potential delays for tens of thousands of firms that have never registered in NISS.
What to Do Now
Map your ownership. Understand your beneficial owners and any foreign investment, lenders, board seats, or contractual control that could count as FOCI. Get familiar with SF 328 and NISS registration — the disclosure vehicle and the system you’ll need standing in. Flow it down. The rule reaches subcontractors at any tier over $5 million, so build FOCI into your teaming due diligence. Plan for timelines. If FOCI review becomes a pre-award gate, start early so it doesn’t cost you an award.
The Bottom Line
For the 37,700 contractors and subcontractors that have never dealt with FOCI, this proposed rule is a significant new compliance burden — one that becomes a pre-award eligibility gate if finalized as written. The national-security driver behind it makes finalization likely. Firms with no foreign ties should get NISS-familiar and document their clean ownership structure now. Firms with any foreign investment, foreign board members, or foreign lenders need to assess mitigation options before the rule lands. The worst time to start is when an award is on the line. Brick by brick.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is this rule final?
No — it is a proposed DFARS rule; the comment period ran into July 2026. But given the national-security driver behind it, contractors should prepare now. The direction is clear, and the pre-award eligibility gate structure means firms that wait for finalization to start will face timeline pressure at the worst possible moment.
I have no classified work — does this reach me?
Yes — that is the point of the change. The proposed rule would extend FOCI to unclassified DoD contracts and subcontracts over $5 million, well beyond the cleared-contractor world. If you hold or pursue DoD contracts at or above that threshold and have any foreign ownership, investment, or control in your structure, this rule is directly about you.
What counts as FOCI?
Foreign ownership, control, or influence exists when a foreign interest has the power to direct or decide matters affecting the management or operations of a company in a way that could result in unauthorized access to classified information or could adversely affect the performance of classified contracts. Under the proposed expansion, the same analysis would apply to covered unclassified contracts — foreign investors, board members, lenders with control rights, and licensing agreements can all create FOCI.
References
Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP. (2026, May). DoD proposes to expand FOCI disclosure and mitigation requirements to unclassified contracts. https://www.akingump.com
Arnold & Porter. (2026, May). DOD extends FOCI disclosure requirements to unclassified contracts and subcontracts greater than $5 million. https://www.arnoldporter.com
Wiley Rein LLP. (2026, May 13). DOD proposes expanding FOCI requirements to cover unclassified contracts. https://www.wiley.law
About the Author
Melanie Patterson
Founder & CEO of Team Integrity Knowledge Center and creator of GovCon iSource. Former nurse turned entrepreneur with over 10 years guiding small, women-owned, and minority-owned businesses to over $10 million in government awards. Build, grow, scale — brick by brick. Contact
Your next step
Talk it through with a TIKC advisor
Continue reading
Related stories

One Faked Test Cost a Navy Supplier $10.9 Million
A company that makes steel for Navy ships let a tester change results so weak steel looked like it passed. It is paying about $10.9…

When Competitors Become Co-Conspirators: Bid Rigging and Collusion
A quiet word with a competitor about who wins which job feels like cooperation. It is a federal antitrust crime. Bid rigging and collusion carry…

The Set-Aside That Was Performed by the Wrong Company. A $4.8 Million Lesson.
A federal IT contractor and its owner agreed to pay $4.8 million after allegedly paying fees to 8(a) firms to win set-aside work, then doing…

The Cover-Up That Is Worse Than the Problem: Obstruction and Altering Records
When an audit or investigation looms, the instinct to clean up a file is a catastrophic one. Deleting an email or backdating a document can…

The Official Who Approved His Own Payday. A Conflict-of-Interest Indictment.
A government contracting official was charged after allegedly approving invoices that funneled money back to a side business he profited from, aided by a contractor…

The Case You Never See Coming: The FCA Seal, First-to-File, and the Disclosure Bar
A whistleblower suit can sit under court seal for years while the government investigates you in secret. Understanding the seal, the first-to-file rule, and the…

Winning on a Promise You Cannot Keep: Fraud in the Inducement
Overstate your staff, your experience, or your capabilities to win the award, and you can poison the entire contract. Fraud in the inducement means the…

The Loyalty You Owe: Honest Services Fraud and the Hidden Conflict
You can commit a federal crime without stealing a dollar. Honest services fraud punishes the person who secretly sells out the loyalty they owe, through…

$377 Million for the Costs It Should Not Have Billed. A Mischarging Lesson.
A major contractor agreed to pay $377 million, one of the largest procurement fraud settlements ever, over how it billed indirect costs to the government…
The Chip That Was Not Real: Counterfeit Electronic Parts and Your Duty to Catch Them
A single counterfeit microchip in a defense system can cost lives and end a company. For many contractors, the law does not just punish knowingly…

Signing for Your Code: The Secure Software Development Self-Attestation
If you sell software to the government, a senior executive now has to personally attest that it was built following secure development practices. That signature…

The NDA Clause That Can Void Your Contract: The Anti-Gag Rule
That confidentiality agreement your employees sign may quietly break federal law. The anti-gag rule bars contractors from using NDAs that stop employees from reporting fraud…




