Lockheed Martin will pay Pentagon millions over F-35 overcharging allegations
WASHINGTON – The maker of the U.S. military's state-of-the-art stealth fighter jet agreed to pay nearly $30 million to settle allegations that it overcharged the Pentagon to produce and maintain the plane, the Justice Department announced Thursday.
The move comes as President Donald Trump says his multibillionaire aide Elon Musk is primed to find "billions" of dollars in Pentagon waste.
The Lockheed Martin Corporation, which received non-competitive contracts to produce the F-35 fighter, allegedly failed between 2013 and 2015 to disclose accurate cost information to the Defense Department's F-35 Joint Program Office during negotiations on five initial production contracts, according to the settlement agreement.
The government argued that the company violated the False Claims Act and the Truth in Negotiations Act, a 1962 law that requires government contractors seeking sole-source (or non-competitive) contracts to disclose all cost information they use to develop their pricing proposals.
The lawsuit, filed in 2017, spanned both Trump's first administration and that of former President Joe Biden.
The company, which currently receives more Pentagon contract money than any other in the world, previously paid $11.3 million to DoD 'for the same undisclosed cost and pricing data' covered by the settlement, the agreement said.
'Lockheed Martin is pleased to resolve this matter and avoid litigation,' said company spokesperson Cailin Schmeer in an emailed statement. 'We deny the False Claim Act allegations and any wrongdoing in the settlement.'
Government officials, however, celebrated the settlement as a victory for taxpayers.
'Those who do business with the government must do so fairly and honestly,' said Acting Assistant Attorney General Brett Shumate of the Justice Department's Civil Division in the release. 'We will pursue contractors that knowingly misuse taxpayer funds.'
Air Force Lt. Gen. Mike Schmidt, who heads the F-35 office, said the settlement shows the government 'will insist on integrity and honesty … We demand 100% accountability for every dollar spent on this program on behalf of U.S. taxpayers.'
According to the release, the lawsuit began as a 'qui tam' action, which allows whistleblowers to file lawsuits on behalf of the government against contractors accused of waste, fraud or abuse. Whistleblowers in 'qui tam' cases sometimes receive a significant portion of any money the government recovers from the contractor.
The portion of the F-35 settlement going to the whistleblower, former Lockheed Martin auditor Patrick Girard, "has not yet been determined," according to the release.
This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: Lockheed Martin and Pentagon settle F-35 overcharge claims
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Fast Company
11 minutes ago
- Fast Company
Gavin Newsom is having his social media moment
'Fuck around' and 'find out,' read a TikTok post, following a screenshot announcing that California is suing President Donald Trump for deploying the National Guard to the streets of Los Angeles. But the TikTok wasn't shared by a typical meme account—it came from California Governor Gavin Newsom. 'I damn near fell over when I realized this was Gov. Newsom's page,' one user commented. Since Friday, demonstrations have erupted across Los Angeles in protest of the president's immigration policies and the ongoing Immigration and Customs Enforcement raids. Although many of the demonstrations have remained peaceful, there have been violent incidents including authorities deploying tear gas and rubber bullets, and protestors setting Waymo vehicles ablaze throughout the city. As tensions escalated, the Trump administration deployed the National Guard and Marines—despite objections from local officials—sparking a lawsuit from the state, threats of arrest against Governor Newsom, and a surge of defiant memes. 'And remember kids, the next time anybody tells you 'the government wouldn't do that', oh yes they would,' says the popular TikTok sound used on Newsom's official account video, playing over screenshots of news headlines and images of armed forces confronting demonstrators. In another viral video from the governor's page, which amassed over 5.4 million views, Taylor Swift's 'You Need To Calm Down' plays over a series of photos of the two politicians. 'r u ok?' the post asks, with a caption reading: 'America's keyboard warrior.' Newsom's clapback drew widespread praise in the comments. 'I do disagree with Newsom a lot but him standing up to tyranny and standing with your state takes some serious guts. Hats off to you Newsom,' wrote one user. He's also taken to his personal account to deliver meme-laced messages to Trump—one featuring a photoshopped image of the president wearing a crown, captioned 'send in the troops.' The slideshow ends with a shot from the musical Hamilton, with text reading: 'Democracy is under assault right before our eyes. It's time for all of us to stand up.' The online showdown has significantly boosted Newsom's social media presence, growing his personal TikTok account by approximately 397,000 followers and his official Governor account by 479,000 since Friday. Newsom is the latest in a growing number of politicians leveraging memes and social media to bypass traditional media and speak directly to the public through humor. Famously, Kamala Harris gained momentum during her presidential campaign with ' Brat summer ' and the coconut tree trend, while Joe Biden leaned into the viral ' Dark Brandon ' meme during his reelection campaign. Although meme strategies can generate enthusiasm and visibility, the 2024 election results suggest that online popularity doesn't always translate at the polls.
Yahoo
15 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Entire Fulbright Scholarship board quits, citing Trump admin actions
All members of the Fulbright Foreign Scholarship Board announced their resignation on Wednesday, releasing a statement accusing President Donald Trump's administration of political interference in the prestigious exchange program. The 12-member board alleged the Trump administration "usurped the authority of the Board" by denying Fulbright awards to "a substantial number of individuals" who were selected for the 2025-2026 academic year. The board also alleged the administration is currently "subjecting" an additional 1,200 international Fulbright recipients to "an unauthorized review process and could reject more." "We believe these actions not only contradict the statute but are antithetical to the Fulbright mission and the values, including free speech and academic freedom, that Congress specified in the statute," the board said in its statement. MORE: State Department delivers crushing news to Fulbright scholar hopefuls in Afghanistan The board oversees the Fulbright Foreign Student Program, which offers international graduate students, young professionals and artists the opportunity to study and conduct research in the United States. The government-funded, non-partisan program -- which was established by Congress in 1942 under then-President Harry Truman's administration -- operates in more than 160 countries worldwide, providing scholarships to approximately 4,000 foreign students annually. In the joint letter on Wednesday, the board said the awards that were overridden by the administration were concentrated in biology, engineering, architecture, agriculture, crop sciences, animal sciences, biochemistry, medical sciences, music and history. MORE: State Dept. suggests Afghan Fulbright hopefuls seek other options as program stalls The board claimed it has raised "legal issues and our strong objections with" senior Trump administration officials "on multiple occasions," including in writing, but says the concerns have not been acknowledged. In a statement to statement to ABC News after the board announced its resignation, a senior State Department official called the decision "a political stunt attempting to undermine President Trump." "It's ridiculous to believe that these members would continue to have final say over the application process, especially when it comes to determining academic suitability and alignment with President Trump's Executive Orders." the official said. The board, however, said in its statement that the decision was not one "we take lightly," woth the board calling on Congress, the courts and future Fulbright Boards to "prevent the administration's efforts to degrade, dismantle, or even eliminate one of our nation's most respected and valuable programs." "Injecting politics and ideological mandates into the Fulbright program violates the letter and spirit of the law that Congress so wisely established nearly eight decades ago," the board concluded in its statement. Entire Fulbright Scholarship board quits, citing Trump admin actions originally appeared on
Yahoo
15 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Justice Department calls Newsom National Guard lawsuit a ‘crass political stunt'
The Trump administration is urging a federal judge to reject California Gov. Gavin Newsom's bid to block the military from supporting immigration enforcement activities in Los Angeles, calling the lawsuit a 'crass political stunt' and warning that the restraining order Newsom wants would endanger federal personnel. 'That would be unprecedented. It would be constitutionally anathema. And it would be dangerous,' Justice Department lawyers said in a response delivered to San Francisco-based U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer Wednesday. In a pointed, 32-page filing replete with political overtones, the administration contended that Trump's decision to deploy the military to help suppress unrest — stemming from ICE raids and arrests taking place across Los Angeles — is entirely within his authority as commander-in-chief, and unreviewable by the court. Breyer, a Clinton appointee, is set to hold a hearing Thursday afternoon on Newsom's request. The governor initially asked the court to block the deployment within two hours, but the judge agreed to a Justice Department request for 24 hours to respond. Trump has authorized the Pentagon to call up nearly 4,000 members of California's National Guard contingent on a mission to protect Immigration and Customs Enforcement facilities and personnel. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has also deployed 700 Marines to Los Angeles. Though federal law generally bars the use of the military to enforce domestic laws, Trump invoked a provision that permits him to call up National Guard troops to protect federal property and personnel when there is a 'rebellion' or 'danger of rebellion.' The Justice Department described the chaotic situation on the ground over the weekend as 'mobs resisting federal authority in a manner that rises to the level of rebellion,' although city and state officials have emphasized that the unrest has impacted only a few relatively small parts of the sprawling metropolis. DOJ lawyers also urged Breyer not to second-guess the president's assessment that military support was needed. Newsom's claim that the law required Trump to consult him before issuing such an order is both wrong and dangerous, DOJ lawyers argued, because it would give state officials an effective veto of the president's military judgment. DOJ attorneys also dismissed as speculative the state's concern that the National Guard or military forces would take part in law enforcement. Images taken on the streets of Los Angeles Tuesday showed Guard forces standing watch as immigration enforcement officers detained and searched potential deportees. The administration argued that those troops were there to protect ICE officials, a distinct mission from carrying out immigration arrests. Justice Department lawyers salted their brief with a series of thinly-veiled political shots at Newsom, speculating that California officials might be 'unwilling' to put a stop to the violence. Two days after Trump suggested Newsom's arrest, the brief also suggests perhaps the governor had broken the law by failing to pass on Trump's order to state Guard officials, although those troops have responded to the president's directive. 'Even if Plaintiffs' interpretation of the statute were correct, the only party acting unlawfully would be Governor Newsom — not President Trump or Secretary Hegseth,' the attorneys wrote. And the Justice Department also quoted Sen. John Fetterman (D-Pa.), who recently criticized fellow Democrats over their posture toward the unrest. The DOJ brief also draws an analogy sure to grate on Newsom: comparing him to Arkansas Gov. Orval Faubus, who sought to use that state's National Guard to resist court-ordered school desegregation in the 1950s. The federal statute Trump invoked 'affords no veto to Governor Newsom over the President's decision to call forth the guard, just as it afforded no veto to Governor Faubus when President Eisenhower last invoked the predecessor [statute] to ensure that the enforcement of federal law was not obstructed,' DOJ lawyers wrote.
