About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline

B-188584 1 (1977-12-23)

handle is hein.gao/gaobadfmz0001 and id is 1 raw text is: 




                                                                     C6


                                        UPeWWEWLLUN SENSUAL

                                           ASH INUB' ON     Q.0  . 305 D43
CF                                                      . .             -


           PILE:   2-188584                   DATE:   DMMin    23P im
C>
           MATTER ECn:     Duabar L Sullivan DreatagC.


           DIGE ST:

                Where low-bidder alleger after ward that State sales
                tax and related factorn were mistakenly omitted from
                bid, and contractikg officer was on constructive
                notice of mistake because of disparity relative to
                second low bId 4ad Goverment estimate, no valid con-
                tract was consummated, notwithstanding mistake was
                one of 1sv and bidder may in fact have verified bid
                if requested.  Since intended bid is not clear, and
                reaciseion is not feasible, payment on ustum  alabant
                basis is liited  to award price plus actual tax itibility.


                Invitation for bids (IFS) No. DALV62-74-3-0055, fo:r dredging
           work In Mississippi, Tennessee, and Alabasa, was issued in March
           of 1974 by thetUnited States Army Coxps of Engineers (Corps).
           The five bids received were opened as scheduled on April 10.
           Dunbar & Sullivan Dredging Co. (Disbar & Sullivan) was the low
           bidder at $7,199,000.  The next low bid was $7,947,500, and the:
           Government estimate for the project was $8,685,000. The centrac
           me   warded to Dunbar & Sullivan on April 24.

                On Nay 1, Dunbar & Sullivan advised the contracting officer
           ofa  mistake in its bid.  Dunbar & Sullivan alleged the. in
           preparing its bid it 'had consulted a standard commercial tax
           service to determine the sales taz liability that-could be antici-
           pated from 'the required perfo6asnce. The tax service apparently
           provided that the State of Misissippi Occupational Sales Tax
           of 2-1/2 perent  of grose receipts did not apply to gross receipts
           from the sale of services to the Federal Government. Diubar &
           Sullivan alleged-that on the basis of that information no' rovision
           was.made in itsbidifor  the cost of aurtittax. However, after
           Dunbar & Sullivan was awarded the contract, it took steps to
           qualify to do business in-Nissiesippi, here it had never worked
           before, and was-advised by the Missisaippi State Tax Commission
           that the 2-1/2-percant Occupational Sales Tax did in fact apply
           to gross receipts from Government contrscts. Dunbar & Sullivan
           therefore requested that the Corps increase the contract price.
           In this connection, the Corps states that the subject tax was not
           included in the Government estimate.

                                        -1  -

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Contact us for annual subscription options:

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

profiles profiles most