The costs of offset are not even broken down in the FMS offer, and if the customer wants to discuss or simply know the costs of the offset, the customer should speak directly with the contractor and not with DSCA. In other words, the U.S. government cannot handle compensation; U.S. Defense Prime Contractors can and do. DSCA provided in its full manual details and analytical explanations for U.S. defense companies, such as offset to get different costs in their contracts and invoices.  Thus, even under FMS, the principal contractors can recover all costs “from all compensation related to these contracts.” Of course, “government agencies do not have the right to compel or compel U.S. companies to enter into an offset agreement.” In fact, during the Cold War, compensation had different functions and often U.S. government agencies were directly involved. With the end of the Cold War, President Bush also ended the responsibility of the American authorities for sensitive practices such as offsets (1990), because they lost the primary political value they had during the Cold War.  Develop a plan to deal with media requests around offset and how the company managed the risks associated with the offset agreement.
It is very easy to equate a compensation agreement with the granting of a large service or product transaction, and it is important to be one step ahead of the transparency of the transaction as a whole with regard to the media and public opinion. In order to increase transparency in transaction agreements, there are recommendations: an obstacle to clearing claims arising from several agreements with a counterparty may therefore be the heterogeneity of obligations that are reflected in different agreements. For example, if one contract is in rubles and the other in currency. In this case, compensation between the contracts of a counterparty is not possible. To compensate for the rights arising from each contract, the entity must enter into a separate agreement with the counterparty (provided, of course, that it has requirements in the same currency). 2. Compensation does not change the composition of the income tax base, since, according to the accrual accounting method, the revenues and expenses of a contract with a consideration are accounted for even before the clearing. In the cash method, products and expenses are calculated after compensation. 1. The agreement must abstain as follows: compensation implies the acceptance of a position opposed to an initial opening position in the securities markets. For example, if you have 100 long XYZ shares, selling 100 shares of XYZ would be the clearing position.
A clearing position can also be generated by hedging instruments such as futures or options. In addition to training, the nature of compensation agreements and the company`s tolerance for the fight against corruption in this area must be addressed within the framework of a specific policy. This policy must, when entering into a transaction agreement, determine all reporting obligations for the conclusion of transaction agreements with certain countries, as well as the steps to be taken by the worker if he wishes to agree on a replacement rate in the context of a transaction. Although widely practiced, some, such as the U.S. government, view these agreements as “market-distorting and ineffective.” On April 16, 1990, a statement of the policy of the President of the United States was issued, which stated that “the decision whether or not to participate in offsets […] ” No U.S. government authority can directly encourage, involve or compel U.S. companies to enter into a compensation agreement for the sale of defense products or services to foreign governments.”  Compensation may be defined as provisions relating to an import agreement between an exporting foreign company or, possibly, a government acting as an intermediary, and an importing government, which require the exporter to operate in order to achieve a second objective of the importing unit, which differs from the acquisition of