Clauses · DFARS · Supply chain and sourcing
DFARS 252.225-7058 Postaward Disclosure of Employment of Individuals Who Work in the People's Republic of China
Does the regulation require it to flow down?
Yes
(c): insert in 'all subcontracts that meet the definition of a covered contract' — subs below $5M or commercial ones don't get it
- Form
- verbatim ('insert this clause... without alteration other than to identify the appropriate parties'), including paragraph (c) itself
- Reaches
- all subcontracts meeting the covered contract definition (> $5M, non-commercial)
Checked against acquisition.gov on 2026-08-04 · edition JAN 2023 · base v0.9.3 Read the text ↗
What it makes you produce
One item for your checklist.
Something you write
Days to weeks, and nobody outside your company has to agree to it.
- DFARS 252.225-7058(b)(2)
The disclosure of how many people perform work in China on the order, with a description of your physical presence there and the street addresses
Owed when the subcontract is over $5 million, is not for commercial products or services, and someone performs work on it in China
When it is used
Only in 'covered contracts': DoD contracts/subcontracts above $5,000,000, EXCLUDING commercial products and services (prescription 225.7021-4(b)). Triggers if any covered entity performs contract work in China — including through owned or leased real estate used in performance.
Read closely
(a) sets the covered-contract definition the whole clause turns on. (b)(2) reads on the Government's fiscal years 2023 and 2024, so on a new award the years the clause names and the years the order runs do not line up, and the prime is the party that knows which report it wants. (c) carries the clause into subcontracts meeting the same definition.
The 12 templates that name it, with the line
Source: acquisition.gov, DFARS 252.225-7058 and 225.7021-4(b) (verified 2026-08-04)
This is research, not legal advice. It states what the regulation says about this clause and cites the paragraph behind it. It does not rule on your order, and it does not rule on whether a prime's markings are correct.