Clauses · FAR · Clauses that carry other clauses
FAR 52.252-2 Clauses Incorporated by Reference
Does the regulation require it to flow down?
No
No mandate. FAR 52.107(b) instructs the CONTRACTING OFFICER, and the clause contains no insertion paragraph; nothing in FAR 52.1 requires a contractor to put it in a subcontract. Primes reproduce it because it is the load-bearing beam of their own flow-down exhibit — without it, a list of clause numbers in a purchase order is arguably a list of numbers, and every clause the prime is obligated to pass down would have to be printed in full, turning a 40-page order into several hundred. Note what breaks in the copy: the clause promises that 'the Contracting Officer will make their full text available' on request, and in a subcontract there is no Contracting Officer in the chain — the promise has no addressee unless the buyer substitutes itself, which the corpus templates generally do not do. That is the leverage point: ask the buyer, in writing, for full text of anything you cannot resolve, and do it before signature.
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 Feb 1998 · base v0.9.3 Read the text ↗
What it makes you produce
One item for your checklist.
Nothing to send, ever
There is no paperwork here. It is a rule you follow while you perform the work.
- FAR 52.252-2
Nothing to send. Every clause number the order names binds you as though its full text were printed there, so resolving each cited number is part of performing the order
Owed when the order cites clauses by number instead of printing them, which is every flow-down exhibit in the trade
When it is used
FAR 52.107(b): 'The contracting officer shall insert the clause at 52.252-2, Clauses Incorporated by Reference, in solicitations and contracts in order to incorporate clauses by reference.' No dollar threshold, no contract type, no commercial or COTS carve-out — the only condition is that the document cites clauses by number instead of printing them, which is true of every flow-down exhibit in the corpus. The operating rules live in FAR 52.102, not in the clause: (a) provisions and clauses should be incorporated by reference to the maximum practical extent, even when used with alternates, prescribed on a 'substantially as follows' basis, requiring Government fill-in, or requiring completion by the offeror; (b) any provision or clause the offeror can access electronically may be incorporated by reference — EXCEPT those prescribed in 52.107, which is why 52.252-2 itself must appear in full text — and the contracting officer must furnish full text on request; (c) clauses not authorized for incorporation by reference (per the matrix at acquisition.gov/smart-matrix) still need a statement identifying every provision requiring completion and at least one electronic address; (e) anything not electronically available must be in full text; (f) clauses may not be incorporated by reference by listing them in 52.252-3 or 52.252-4, the Alterations instruments. Its solicitation twin is the provision 52.252-1.
Read closely
Four things ride on each citation — the date designation against the text in force today, whether an alternate is named, whether the number is a solicitation provision rather than a clause, and whether it carries a deviation designator. FAR 52.102(b) entitles the holder to full text on request; the clause promises it from a contracting officer, and a subcontract has none in the chain unless the buyer substitutes itself, which prime templates generally do not do.
The 1 template that name it, with the line
Source: acquisition.gov, FAR 52.252-2, FAR 52.107(b), FAR 52.102(a)-(f), FAR 52.212-5 (Mar 2026) and FAR 52.244-6 (Oct 2025) (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.