In policy debate, a plan inclusive counterplan (or PIC) is a counterplan presented by the negative team which incorporates some of the affirmative's plan either functionally or textually. Most judges consider PICs theoretically legitimate although it is possible for the affirmative to defeat them on the grounds that they are illegitimate. Because they moot much of the 1AC offense, they are considered one of the deadliest negative strategies.
PICs include agent counterplans which propose to do the affirmative plan with a different agent, and exclusionary counterplans which exclude part of the affirmative plan. For example, if the affirmative plan was to "Pass the farm bill" a PIC would be to "Pass parts A and B of the farm bill". Additionally, PICs include Word PICs. First read in 2000 at the Wake Forest tournament by Jonathan Paul, a Word PIC does the affirmative but changes a word in the plan text e.g. use Nihon instead of Japan because Japan is an imperialist term. A well-worded PIC cannot be permed without severance because it is plan minus.