Defense Funding in the 2025 Reconciliation Law (H.R. 1; P.L. 119-21, Title II)

INSIGHTi

Defense Funding in the 2025 Reconciliation

Law (H.R. 1; P.L. 119-21, Title II)

Updated July 24, 2025

Introduction

On July 3, 2025, Congress passed the 2025 reconciliation legislation (H.R. 1), which President Donald J.

Trump signed into law on July 4, 2025 (P.L. 119-21). This product summarizes funding provisions

totaling $156.2 billion in FY2025 for defense purposes in Title II of the legislation (see Table 1).

Background

In April 2025, the House and Senate adopted H.Con.Res. 14, a budget resolution for FY2025 which

included reconciliation directives to several House and Senate Committees. Section 2001(b)(2) of the

resolution instructed the House Armed Services Committee (HASC) to submit “changes in laws under its

jurisdiction that increase the deficit by not more than” $100 billion over the 10-year period FY2025FY2034, whereas Section 2002(a)(2)(B) instructed the Senate Armed Services Committee (SASC) to

submit changes increasing the deficit by not more than $150 billion over this period.

On May 22, 2025, the House passed legislation known as the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (H.R. 1), Title II

of which included the legislative recommendations submitted by HASC, as amended. On June 3, 2025,

Senator Roger Wicker, chair of SASC, issued a press release containing legislative text of a draft version

of Title II with SASC’s legislative recommendations. On June 25, 2025, Senator Wicker issued a press

release with an updated draft version. On July 1, 2025, the Senate passed an amendment (S.Amdt. 2360)

to H.R. 1, Title II of which largely aligned with the SASC chair’s updated draft.

On July 3, 2025, the House passed the Senate-passed version of H.R. 1. The President signed the bill into

law on July 4. On July 21, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimated that the provisions in Title

II of P.L. 119-21 would result in a net increase in the budget deficit of approximately $149.5 billion over

the period of 2025-2034.

Congressional Research Service

https://crsreports.congress.gov

IN12580

CRS INSIGHT

Prepared for Members and

Committees of Congress

Congressional Research Service

2

P.L. 119-21, Title II

The enacted version provided $156.2 billion in mandatory defense funding in FY2025 (see Table 1). In

general, the legislation provided funding for shipbuilding, air and missile defenses, munitions and supply

chains, and other military capabilities. All funds carry a five-year period of availability, meaning that all

funds could be obligated until September 30, 2029, and expended through FY2034. In addition to the

funding detailed in Table 1, the enacted version contained a provision to authorize certain military

construction projects (Section 20013).

Table 1. Appropriations in P.L. 119-21, Title II

(in millions of nominal U.S. dollars)

SASC

ChairReleased

Draftb

Difference

(SASCHASC)

Enacted

(P.L. 11921)

Section Title

Section

HousePassed

H.R. 1a

Enhancement of Department of Defense Resources

for Improving the Quality of Life for Military

Personnel

20001c

$7,315

$7,477

+$162

$7,477

Enhancement of Department of Defense Resources

for Shipbuilding

20002

$33,751

$29,176

-$4,575

$29,176

Enhancement of Department of Defense Resources

for Integrated Air and Missile Defensed

20003

$24,746

$24,413

-$333

$24,413

Enhancement of Department of Defense Resources

for Munitions and Supply Chain Resiliency

20004

$20,696

$25,381

+$4,685

$25,381

Enhancement of Department of Defense Resources

for Scaling Low-Cost Weapons into Production

20005

$13,024

$16,049

+$3,025

$16,049

Enhancement of Department of Defense Resources

for Improving the Efficiency and Cybersecurity of the

Department of Defense

20006

$380

$380

$0

$380

Enhancement of Department of Defense Resources

for Air Superiority

20007

$7,271

$8,644

+$1,373

$8,644

Enhancement of Resources for Nuclear Forces

20008

$12,853

$14,688

+$1,835

$14,688

Enhancement of Department of Defense Resources

to Improve Capabilities of United States Indo-Pacific

Command

20009

$11,119

$12,655

+$1,536

$12,655

Enhancement of Department of Defense Resources

for Improving the Readiness of the Armed Forces

20010

$11,546

$16,343

+$4,797

$16,343

Improving Department of Defense Border Support

and Counterdrug Missions

20011

$5,000

$1,000

-$4,000

$1,000

Department of Defense Oversight

20012

$10

$10

$0

$10

$147,711f

$156,216b

+$8,505

$156,216

Totale

Source: CRS analysis of the engrossed version of H.R. 1; the updated SASC chair-released draft published on June 25,

2025; and the enacted version of H.R. 1 (P.L. 119-21).

a. According to the House Budget Committee Report accompanying H.R. 1 (H.Rept. 119-106, Book 1): “Although the

House Committee on Armed Services exceeded its instruction [i.e., proposed changes in laws within its jurisdiction

that increase the deficit by more than $100 billion], the legislative recommendations transmitted by the House

Committee on Armed Services comply with the instruction given to the Senate Committee on Armed Services in

H.Con.Res. 14 [i.e., instructions to propose changes in laws that increase the deficit by not more than $150 billion].”

Congressional Research Service

b.

c.

d.

e.

f.

Figure reflects changes in the House-adopted engrossment correction to H.R. 1 (H.Res. 492). Prior to the

amendment, the House-passed bill would have provided $13,524 million for low-cost weapons in Section 20005,

$12,915 million for nuclear forces in Section 20008, and $2,000 million for intelligence programs in Section 20012.

Figures reflect the updated version of the SASC chair-released draft issued on June 25, 2025.

In both versions, subsections (b) and (c) of Section 20001 would allow for an expansion in the construction of

privatized military housing.

For more information, see CRS Insight IN12576, Golden Dome: Funding in the 2025 Reconciliation Law (H.R. 1; P.L. 11921), by Hannah D. Dennis and Daniel M. Gettinger.

Prior to engrossment, funding provisions of Title II of H.R. 1 summed to $150.3 billion in new budget authority. The

Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimated that net budget authority from these initial provisions would total

$147.6 billion through 2034, due to the anticipated effects of other provisions of law, such as 2 U.S.C. Chapter 20A.

The House later directed the Clerk of the House of Representatives to make certain corrections to H.R. 1 in the

engrossment of the bill.

Figure reflects changes in the House-adopted engrossment correction to H.R. 1 (H.Res. 492).

Spending Plans for Line-Item Funding

Neither the House-passed, SASC chair-released, Senate-passed, nor enacted bill versions included a

committee report or other accompanying explanatory statement linking each bill provision to budgetary

line-item appropriation accounts, as is typical in annual appropriations acts. Section 20014 of the Housepassed and SASC chair-released versions would have required DOD to report how it intends to allocate

the funds provided in Title II at the line-item level, though this provision was not enacted after the Senate

Parliamentarian reportedly advised that aspects of the provision would violate the Senate’s Byrd Rule.

The enacted version did, however, include a spending plan requirement for military construction (Section

20013(b)).

Issues for Congress

Congressional Oversight of Funds Distribution

While P.L. 119-21 established specific purposes, dollar amounts, and periods of availability for each

funding provision, these funding provisions differ in key respects from the legislative language of past

annual appropriations acts. For example, several provisions of the enacted law provided funds for the

“development, production, and integration” of certain weapon systems, without specifying a portion of

funding for research, development, test and evaluation (RDT&E) activities and a separate portion for

procurement. Similarly, while many Title II provisions appropriated funds “to the Secretary of Defense

for fiscal year 2025,” some provisions mentioned more than one military department, without specifying

which department was to execute what portion of the provision’s funding (e.g., “Navy and Air Force” in

Section 20004(a)(3)).

Congress may consider whether DOD’s proposed line-item distribution of reconciliation funds, as

detailed in its FY2026 budget request, meets congressional intent as stated in the enacted version of the

bill, and whether to provide DOD with additional guidance on funds distribution in subsequent acts of

Congress (see “Spending Plans”). On June 9, 2025, for example, the House Appropriations Committee

released a draft FY2026 “Defense Appropriations Bill” that would require DOD, in Section 8158, to

submit spend plans “by program, project, and activity, with detailed justifications” for amounts enacted

through the FY2025 budget reconciliation process.

3

Congressional Research Service

4

Reprogramming and Reclassification Implications

Relatedly, Congress may consider to what extent it intends to permit DOD to revise its initial allocation of

funds among departmental budgetary accounts over time. To the extent that a statutory provision is

ambiguous as to initial funds distribution (discussed above), Congress may consider to what extent the

Secretary may internally reprogram or reclassify funds as needed, with or without congressional

notification, among relevant departmental budgetary accounts (e.g., RDT&E accounts of multiple military

departments) or within a given account (e.g., within RDT&E, Navy) while keeping to the purpose and

dollar amount specified in the funding provision.

DOD IG Oversight of Funding

Section 20012 of P.L. 119-21 provided the DOD Inspector General $10 million to conduct oversight of

the funding provided in the title. Such funding is to remain available for obligation until September 30,

2029. Congress may assess whether $10 million is sufficient for the Inspector General to conduct

oversight of DOD activities as directed by the act.

Author Information

Cameron M. Keys

Analyst in Defense Logistics and Resource Management

Policy

Daniel M. Gettinger

Analyst in U.S. Defense Policy

Disclaimer

This document was prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS). CRS serves as nonpartisan shared staff

to congressional committees and Members of Congress. It operates solely at the behest of and under the direction of

Congress. Information in a CRS Report should not be relied upon for purposes other than public understanding of

information that has been provided by CRS to Members of Congress in connection with CRS’s institutional role.

CRS Reports, as a work of the United States Government, are not subject to copyright protection in the United

States. Any CRS Report may be reproduced and distributed in its entirety without permission from CRS. However,

as a CRS Report may include copyrighted images or material from a third party, you may need to obtain the

permission of the copyright holder if you wish to copy or otherwise use copyrighted material.

IN12580 · VERSION 4 · UPDATED