POLISCOPE
Back to feed
FEDERALhearing transcript
High Impact

Congressional Hearing on TransDigm Military Contract Pricing

Original title: PRICE GOUGING IN MILITARY CONTRACTS: NEW INSPECTOR GENERAL REPORT EXPOSES EXCESS PROFIT OBTAINED BY TRANSDIGM GROUP

January 1, 2022

Track this bill to get notified when it advances a stage. One tap to stop, anytime.

The Frame

What this does

The hearing addresses whether taxpayer funds are being used efficiently in defense procurement, specifically regarding whether a private contractor should be required to return $20.8 million in profits identified as excessive by the Department of Defense.

Who is mentioned in the record

Potentially affected actors named in the source documents. Mention is not a position.

TransDigm Group Inc.

The company is the subject of a congressional investigation and potential pressure to return $20.8 million in profits.

Department of Defense

The agency is responsible for procuring spare parts and managing contracts with TransDigm.

U.S. Taxpayers

Taxpayer funds are used to pay for the military contracts in question.

What changed

Last recorded activity January 1, 2022.

What's next

Next step not available in the current record.

Summary

The House Committee on Oversight and Reform held a hearing to address a Department of Defense Inspector General report alleging that TransDigm Group charged excessive prices for military aircraft spare parts. The report claims the company earned $20.8 million in s, with some parts marked up by as much as 3,850 percent.

Key Facts

  • The Department of Defense Inspector General identified $20.8 million in excess profits earned by TransDigm Group on over 100 spare parts contracts.
  • Profit margins on individual parts identified in the report ranged from 68 percent to 3,850 percent.
  • TransDigm allegedly refused to provide cost data requested by Department of Defense contracting officers to verify fair pricing.
  • A specific example cited involved a 'linear actuating cap' for aircraft that cost $189 to produce but was sold to the military for over $7,000.
  • The committee alleges TransDigm's business model involves acquiring companies with sole-source contracts and subsequently increasing prices on mission-critical parts.
  • This hearing follows a previous 2019 committee investigation into the same company regarding similar pricing practices.

Why It Matters

The hearing addresses whether taxpayer funds are being used efficiently in defense procurement, specifically regarding whether a private contractor should be required to return $20.8 million in profits identified as excessive by the Department of Defense.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is TransDigm accused of doing?
The company is accused of 'price gouging' by charging the military significantly higher prices for spare parts than the cost of production, resulting in $20.8 million in s.
How does TransDigm allegedly justify these prices?
The committee report suggests the company utilizes a business model of acquiring sole-source providers and then raising prices, while refusing to provide the Department of Defense with the cost data necessary to determine if prices are fair.

News Coverage

No news coverage found yet. Articles are indexed twice daily.

Sponsors

Discoveries

Patterns POLISCOPE noticed across the record. These are observations to investigate, not conclusions.

policy shift100% confidence

Repeat Offender Pattern

The committee noted that this is a recurring issue with the same company, as they previously held a hearing on TransDigm's pricing three years prior.

Connected Entities

personCarolyn B. MaloneyChairwoman of the House Committee on Oversight and Reform.Map →
personNicholas HowleyFounder and Executive Chairman of TransDigm Group Inc.Map →
organizationTransDigm Group Inc.Defense contractor accused of price gouging on spare parts.Map →
personTheresa S. HullDeputy Inspector General, Department of Defense.Map →
personKevin SteinChief Executive Officer of TransDigm Group Inc.Map →

Sources

Open source document

www.govinfo.gov

Analysis Score

0–100
  • Significance85
    How much this matters to a regular citizen
  • Controversy75
    Intensity of disagreement among stakeholders
  • Entertainment40
    Compellingness for a non-policy-wonk reader
  • Buzz50
    Current news / social attention level

Publisher tools

Share or embed this record

POLISCOPE publisher tools

Share or embed this record