Clauses · FAR · Pricing and audit · provision
FAR 52.215-22 Limitations on Pass-Through Charges-Identification of Subcontract Effort
Does the regulation require it to flow down?
No
The provision itself has no flow-down mandate and cannot have one: it is a proposal-preparation instrument addressed to offerors. The mandate lives in its twin, the CLAUSE 52.215-23 (JUN 2020, already in the base), whose paragraph (f) requires the substance in cost-reimbursement subcontracts over the SAT (and, for DoD, in certain fixed-price subcontracts over the certified cost or pricing data threshold). Primes flow 52.215-22 down anyway because the sub is being asked for a cost proposal and the prime needs the sub's own 70 percent breakout to build its own — L3Harris is the only corpus document that tags it correctly, annotating it '(applies to solicitations containing FAR 52.215-23)'
A clause can reach your subcontract without a mandate. Once it is in your document, it is a contract term all the same. The missing mandate is a fact about the regulation. It is not a ruling on your order.
Checked against acquisition.gov on 2026-08-05 · edition OCT 2009 · base v0.9.3 Read the text ↗
What it makes you produce
2 items for your checklist, slowest first.
Something you write2
Days to weeks, and nobody outside your company has to agree to it.
An identification, in your proposal, of the total cost of the work you will perform and the total cost of the work each subcontractor will perform
FAR 52.215-22(c)(1)- FAR 52.215-22(c)(2)
The dollar amount of indirect cost and profit applied to the subcontracted work, with a written description of the added value you provide
Owed where the subcontracted effort exceeds 70 percent of the total cost of the work to be performed under the order; (c)(3) asks the same of a lower tier that itself passes 70 percent
When it is used
A SOLICITATION PROVISION, not a clause. FAR 15.408(n)(1): the contracting officer inserts 52.215-22 in solicitations that contain the clause at 52.215-23, Limitations on Pass-Through Charges — so its scope is exactly the scope of that clause. Under 15.408(n)(2)(i), civilian agencies use 52.215-23 when the estimated contract or order value exceeds the simplified acquisition threshold ($350k) and a cost-reimbursement type is expected; DoD uses it when the value exceeds the certified cost or pricing data threshold ($2.5M, FAR 15.403-4(a)(1)) and the contract type is NOT one of six excluded types — firm-fixed-price with adequate price competition, fixed-price-EPA with adequate price competition, firm-fixed-price for commercial products/services, fixed-price-EPA for commercial products/services, fixed-price incentive with adequate price competition, or fixed-price incentive for commercial products/services. 15.408(n)(2)(ii) lets the contracting officer use the clause below the thresholds and on any contract type when it is appropriate, so the exclusions are a default and not a guarantee. No alternates on the provision (52.215-23 has an Alternate I dated OCT 2009; 52.215-22 has none).
Read closely
Added value is not self-declared. FAR 52.215-23 defines it as subcontract management functions the contracting officer determines benefit the Government, and lists the recognized ones — processing orders for parts or services, maintaining inventory, reducing delivery lead times, managing multiple sources, coordinating deliveries, performing quality assurance. Paragraph (b) is the general rule that the proposal excludes excessive pass-through charges.
The 5 templates that name it, with the line
Source: acquisition.gov, FAR 52.215-22, FAR 15.408(n), FAR 52.215-23, FAR 15.403-4(a)(1), and the FAR Overhaul part 15 deviation guide 15.110(v) (verified 2026-08-05)
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.