A recent US Court of Federal Claims ruling provides important clarity to the application of the Trade Agreements Act and may help level the playing field between products made in the US from foreign components vs. foreign made products sold straight to federal agencies.  As reported by Donna Yesner and Stephen Ruscus of Morgan Lewis, the Claims Court ruling in Acetris Health invalidated a VA and DOD interpretation that had resulted in the agencies previously prohibiting US government purchases of pharmaceuticals classified as domestic end products under the Buy American Act if they were determined to be products of India, China, or other non-favored countries under the Trade Agreements Act.  The Court found that products “manufactured in the United States” can be purchased under the clause without regard to the source of the underlying components and ingredients.  According to Yesner and Ruscus, “Although the ruling was specifically on pharmaceuticals, the decision is important to all suppliers of product to the government because it interprets the interplay of the BAA and TAA in all contracts subject to the TAA—currently those greater than $180,000—and confirms that the TAA “substantial transformation” test only controls if the product is not ‘manufactured’ in the United States.”  The implications of this ruling are potentially far-reaching.  The precedent could make TAA compliance easier for many contractors.  Allen Federal recommends reviewing this ruling and its potential impact on your company with competent counsel.