Can Congress pass a FY26 defense budget this year? Here are 12 key issues for lawmakers.

WASHINGTON — Congressional defense hawks in the Senate are once again pushing to boost the topline of the defense budget in fiscal 2026, but as lawmakers return to Capitol Hill in September, they will have to face an even more pressing question: Will they be able to pass a full-year spending bill at all?

Congress failed at passing FY25 appropriations after talks between Republicans and Democrats broke down, resulting in the approval of a full year continuing resolution in March. The bill marked the first time the Defense Department will have been funded under a CR for an entire year.

This year, the budget process has been even more tumultuous — even with Republican control of both the House and the Senate — raising questions about whether the Pentagon is heading toward another full-year funding extension.

For much of the year, lawmakers have been wrapped up in passing reconciliation legislation known as the One Big Beautiful Bill, a Trump-backed megabill that contained an extra $150 billion in defense funding as well as other priority items. 

Meanwhile, the Pentagon has dragged its feet in presenting its own budget request for FY26, putting out some budget documents in late June while other more detailed justification documents are still yet to be released or presented to Congress. (House appropriators drafted their version of the FY26 defense bill without having seen the Pentagon’s budget proposal.)

With the clock ticking until government funding runs out when the new fiscal year starts on Oct. 1, Congress’s first order of business upon its return from recess next week will be teeing up and passing a short-term continuing resolution that will give lawmakers time to work out a spending agreement.

After that, the House and Senate will start the more difficult work of hammering out appropriations bills, with the House promoting a bill that adheres to the Defense Department’s flat $848 billion budget request and the Senate advocating for a topline funding bump of upwards of $22 billion.

Meanwhile, neither chamber has taken its version of the National Defense Authorization Act to the floor yet, but the Senate is slated to start debate on its NDAA as soon as lawmakers return in September. 

Some experts say differences in the various defense bills might not ultimately matter.

“The most probable outcome, in our view, for FY26 discretionary spending is a full-year continuing resolution similar to what occurred in FY25,” Byron Callan of Capital Alpha Partners said in an Aug. 1 note after the Senate Appropriations Committee passed its versions of the defense bill out of committee. “That would keep DoD discretionary at the same level as FY25 for FY26, but we would expect more anomalies to allow rate increases and new starts.”

As Capitol Hill gets down to business, here’s a look at how the Pentagon and each congressional defense committee is approaching 12 major issues this budget season:

Defense Budget Topline

Topline budget numbers among the appropriations and authorizing committees aren’t apples to apples, with no single bill containing the whole of national defense spending.

The NDAA — which sanctions funds but does not actually obligate them  — includes the Defense Department as well as defense spending within the Department of Energy, but does not include about $11.5 billion in national security spending outside the jurisdiction of the House and Senate armed services committees.

Meanwhile, House and Senate defense appropriations bills cover most of the Defense Department and some intelligence-related spending, but not defense spending at the Department of Energy or military construction spending.

President’s budget: The Defense Department requested $848.3 billion in discretionary funds for fiscal 2026, flat with the enacted full-year continuing resolution for FY25.

Reconciliation: The reconciliation bill added $150 billion in mandatory funds available during the Trump administration. The Pentagon intends to use $113.3 billion of that funding in FY26.

HASC NDAA: Authorizes $882.6 billion in defense spending, including $848.3 billion for the Defense Department.

SASC NDAA: Boosts defense spending by $32 billion to $913.9 billion in defense spending, with $ 878.7 billion for the Defense Department.

House defense appropriations: Adheres to OMB-approved amount by appropriating $831.5 billion.

Senate defense appropriations: Includes $851.9 billion, increasing defense funding by about $22 billion.

F-35 Joint Strike Fighter

President’s budget: Purchases 47 F-35s: 24 F-35As, 11 F-35Bs and 12 F-35Cs.

Reconciliation bill: Did not add money for additional F-35s.

HASC NDAA: Authorizes the 47 F-35s requested by the department.

SASC NDAA: Authorizes 57 F-35s, adding 10 F-35As.

House defense appropriations: Adds funds for a total of 69 F-35s, including 42 F-35As, 13 F-35Bs and 14 F-35Cs.

Senate defense appropriations: Funds the 47 F-35s requested in the budget.

Golden Dome

President’s budget: Outside of the reconciliation spending, the department’s budget request includes no funding specifically earmarked for Golden Dome.

Reconciliation: Includes $25 billion in Golden Dome spending, all of which the department intends to use in FY26.

HASC NDAA: Modifies national missile defense policy to include the deployment of a next-generation missile shield for the US homeland such as Golden Dome, and requires yearly reports on Golden Dome.

SASC NDAA: Modifies national missile defense policy to reflect Golden Dome and codifies the position of Direct Reporting Program Manager (DRPM) for Golden Dome.

House defense appropriations: The bill contains $13 billion in space and missile defense funds that appropriators said could fall under the Golden Dome umbrella, broken down into $8.8 billion for Missile Defense Agency programs and $4.1 billion for Space Force programs.

Senate defense appropriations: The bill report states that the Pentagon “has not yet provided the Committee with sufficiently detailed proposals to accurately assess” Golden Dome, and requires a briefing on its cost, architecture and acquisition strategy.

F-15EX

President’s budget: No aircraft funded through discretionary budget.

Reconciliation: Included $3.1 billion to increase F-15EX production. The Pentagon intends to use that money to buy 21 F-15EXs in FY26.

HASC NDAA: Conforms to DoD recommendations.

SASC NDAA: Conforms to DoD recommendations.

House defense appropriations: Adds $345 million for the procurement of three F–15EX aircraft.

Senate defense appropriations: Conforms to DoD recommendations.

E-7 Wedgetail

President’s budget: Cancelled the program due to survivability and cost concerns, but included $199 million to wrap up current activities.

Reconciliation: Did not address the E-7.

HASC NDAA: Adds $600 million to continue the rapid prototyping program for a total of $799 million.

SASC NDAA: Adds $700 million to continue development and procurement, for a total of $899 million.

House defense appropriations: Includes a total of $500 million to continue the E-7 program.

Senate defense appropriations: Adds $647 million for a total of $846 million.

A-10 Retirement

President’s Budget: Retires the remaining A-10 Warthogs in FY26.

Reconciliation: Did not address the A-10.

HASC NDAA: During the markup process, HASC passed an amendment prohibiting retirements of any A-10s in FY26.

SASC NDAA: Mandates that the Air Force retain 103 A-10s in its inventory.

House defense appropriations: Did not address the A-10 retirement.

Senate defense appropriations: Did not address the A-10 retirement. 

F/A-XX

President’s budget: Includes $74 million, with the program currently under review. The White House has said additional congressional funding to continue the new naval fighter could strain the defense aviation industrial base and “delay the higher-priority F-47 program.”

Reconciliation: $750 million to “accelerate” the F/A-XX program

HASC NDAA: Did not include additional funding due to reconciliation funds.

SASC NDAA: Adds $500 million to F/A-XX through “Link Plumeria” special access program code.

House defense appropriations: Added $971 million to continue development of the F/A–XX program with the intent of accelerating initial operational capability. Also directs the Navy to provide an updated schedule for awarding the engineering, manufacturing and design contract.

Senate defense appropriations: Added about $1.4 billion to continue F/A-XX development.

E-2D

President’s budget: Four aircraft

Reconciliation bill: Not included in reconciliation bill.

HASC NDAA: Four aircraft

SASC NDAA: Strips $1.5 billion from the program, described in the committee report as “E-2D cancellation.”

House defense appropriations: Four aircraft

Senate defense appropriations: Strips about $1.5 billion, cancelling the procurement of four aircraft.

Landing Ship Medium

President’s budget: No discretionary funding is requested in FY26.

Reconciliation bill: The Pentagon aims to use reconciliation funds to procure nine LSMs in FY26. Congressional guidance states that funding in the reconciliation would allow the department to purchase eight LSMs.

HASC NDAA: Adheres to the president’s budget.

SASC NDAA: Adheres to the president’s budget.

House defense appropriations: Adds $225 million for one ship.

Senate defense appropriations: Adheres to the president’s budget.

Joint Light Tactical Vehicle

President’s budget: The Army canceled further procurement of the JLTV, while the Marine Corps included about $82 million to buy 138 JLTVs.

Reconciliation: Does not include funding for JLTV.

HASC NDAA: Conformed to DoD recommendations

SASC NDAA: Adds $168 million for 224 additional JLTVs for the Marine Corps.

House defense appropriations: Included $345 million for 863 JLTVs for the Army, and $169 million for 224 JLTVs for the Marine Corps.

Senate defense appropriations: Conforms to DoD recommendations, directs the Marine Corps to provide an updated acquisition strategy.

Improved Turbine Engine Program

President’s budget: Doesn’t include funding.

Reconciliation: Congress included $63 million for “for development of advanced rotary-wing engines.” Congressional guidance stipulates this funding is meant to continue the ITEP program.

HASC NDAA: Doesn’t include funding.

SASC NDAA: Doesn’t include funding.

House defense appropriations: $175 million for the Improved Turbine Engine Program (ITEP)

Senate defense appropriations: Doesn’t include funding.

Ukraine

President’s budget: The Pentagon did not include money for Ukraine in the budget request.

Reconciliation: Did not include funding for Ukraine.

HASC NDAA: The chairman’s mark included $300 million for the Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative, and lawmakers added another $100 million during the markup process, for a total of $400 million.

SASC NDAA: Adds $500 million for USAI

House defense appropriations: House appropriators did not include money for Ukraine in the spending bill. (https://breakingdefense.com/2025/07/house-passes-832b-defense-appropriations-bill/)

Senate defense appropriations: Adds $800 million for USAI