Inside Trump's Plan to Overhaul Federal Procurement: Efficiency vs. Inclusion Debate Heats Up

On April 16, 2025, President Donald Trump unveiled a sweeping plan to overhaul the federal government's procurement system, a process that channels nearly $1 trillion annually into contracts for goods and services. The initiative, spearheaded by the Office of Federal Procurement Policy (OFPP), promises to rewrite the Federal Acquisition Regulations (FAR), a dense rulebook governing how the government buys everything from office supplies to military equipment. The goal is clear: slash bureaucratic red tape, boost competition, and deliver better value for taxpayers.

The FAR, spanning over 2,000 pages and packed with nearly 3,000 directives, has long been criticized for stifling innovation and favoring large vendors who can navigate its complexities. For years, small businesses and startups have struggled to compete, often deterred by high compliance costs and lengthy acquisition timelines. Trump's plan, dubbed the Revolutionary FAR Overhaul (RFO), aims to change that by simplifying rules, rewriting them in plain English, and removing what the administration calls outdated requirements.

Yet the overhaul has ignited a broader conversation. While supporters hail it as a necessary fix to a broken system, others question its implications, particularly the decision to eliminate diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) clauses from contracts. The debate underscores a tension between efficiency and equity, with stakeholders on all sides weighing the real-world impacts of such a dramatic shift.

At its core, the reform seeks to align federal purchasing with private sector practices, where speed and agility often outpace the government's plodding processes. But can the overhaul deliver on its promises without sacrificing fairness or transparency? The answer depends on how the changes unfold and who stands to benefit.

The federal procurement process is notoriously slow, with transactions that take days in the private sector often dragging on for months or even years in government. A single contract can face multiple legal reviews, public comment periods, and procedural challenges, as illustrated by a mission-support contract delayed nearly two years due to a single comment triggering a cascade of reviews. The FAR's complexity, compounded by agency-specific supplements that push the total page count past 5,000, creates a labyrinth that frustrates both buyers and vendors.

To address this, the RFO prioritizes a faster acquisition cycle and lower barriers to entry. A key component is rewriting the FAR in plain English, a move rooted in decades of efforts to make government rules more accessible. Since the 1970s, presidents from Nixon to Carter have pushed for clearer language, and the 2010 Plain Writing Act cemented this principle. Early feedback suggests that simplified rules could reduce misunderstandings, cut compliance costs, and encourage smaller firms to bid on contracts.

The overhaul also eliminates what the administration deems non-essential regulations, including DEI clauses tied to prior mandates. The General Services Administration (GSA) has already issued directives to remove these clauses from contracts, requiring contractors to certify compliance with anti-discrimination laws instead. Supporters argue this refocuses procurement on merit and cost-efficiency, but others warn it could undo progress in expanding opportunities for historically underrepresented groups.

Transparency is another pillar of the reform. A new website will offer real-time updates on regulatory changes, buyer guides, and contract data, building on platforms like SAM.gov and MadeInAmerica.gov. While this promises greater public access, it also raises concerns about administrative burdens and the potential exposure of sensitive pricing information, which could deter some vendors from participating.

Small businesses and startups stand to gain significantly from the overhaul, at least in theory. By simplifying regulations and reducing compliance costs, the RFO aims to level the playing field, allowing smaller players to compete with entrenched vendors. Recent changes, such as higher thresholds for micro-purchases and simplified acquisitions, make it easier for small firms to secure lower-value contracts. Faster payment rules for subcontractors also offer relief, addressing long-standing complaints about delayed cash flow.

However, new compliance requirements, like mandatory recertification of small business size status after mergers or acquisitions, introduce complexity. These rules aim to ensure only genuinely small firms benefit from set-aside contracts, but they could reduce the appeal of small businesses as acquisition targets. Some industry leaders worry that increased transparency, while valuable, might lead to more bid protests and litigation, further complicating the process.

The removal of DEI clauses has sparked particular controversy. Advocates for diversity in contracting argue that eliminating these requirements could limit opportunities for minority-owned and women-owned businesses, which have historically relied on such provisions to gain a foothold. On the other hand, those backing the change contend that a merit-based system will foster fairer competition and reduce administrative overhead. The debate reflects broader questions about how to balance equity with efficiency in a system that serves diverse public interests.

As the OFPP and FAR Council begin the arduous task of rewriting regulations, the success of the overhaul hinges on execution. Simplifying a 2,000-page rulebook without sacrificing legal precision is no small feat, and the transition could strain an already stretched acquisition workforce. Industry stakeholders, from small business owners to major contractors, are watching closely, eager for changes that deliver on the promise of a more agile system but wary of unintended consequences.

The stakes are high. Federal procurement touches nearly every aspect of government operations, from healthcare to defense to infrastructure. A streamlined system could save billions and spur innovation, but missteps could exacerbate inequities or erode public trust. For now, the overhaul represents a bold bet on efficiency, one that will shape the government's role as the world's largest buyer for years to come.