WASHINGTON - The White House made headlines recently by declaring its FY26 defense budget request would break the trillion-dollar mark, but the president's claims don't quite hold up to scrutiny. While the administration did announce a $1.01 trillion national security budget, the reality is far murkier. That topline number, which includes the Department of Defense and other national security costs outside of the Pentagon, hinges on an influx of $119.3 billion from a budget reconciliation bill being drafted in Congress. Without it, the actual defense topline is considerably lower.
What the Numbers Really Say
The FY26 discretionary national security budget comes in at $892.6 billion, excluding reconciliation funds. That figure matches the FY25 enacted level, meaning national security funding remains flat in nominal terms and declines after adjusting for inflation. The topline figure is well below the Trump administration’s trillion-dollar promise and even falls short of the Biden administration’s FY26 projection of $924.2 billion. This is not a minor discrepancy. It reflects how much the FY26 request relies on budget maneuvering rather than a true increase to the Pentagon's base budget.
According to figures released by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), the Pentagon's portion of the broader national security figure is slated to grow from $848.3 billion enacted in FY25 to $961.6 billion in FY26, a 13.4 percent increase. But that growth, which amounts to $113.3 billion, comes entirely from the reconciliation package being drafted in Congress. The Pentagon’s base budget would also stay flat, hovering around $850 billion. For comparison, the Biden administration anticipated an $876.8 billion base budget in FY26.
Budget documents describe the $113.3 billion in new defense spending as "mandatory funding" routed through reconciliation, rather than a discretionary adjustment. Another $6 billion in reconciliation funding is going to the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA), which makes up the remainder of the $119.3 billion national security increase in FY26.
A Familiar Playbook
First-year budgets from new administrations often reflect a hybrid of old and new priorities. Because it takes roughly a year to produce a full federal budget, the Trump administration inherited most of the Biden team’s FY26 planning. While the president has already taken the axe to various federal agencies and their budgets, the FY26 request will still reflect a reworked version of his predecessor's spending plan.
A clearer picture of the administration's defense budget outlook may not emerge until the FY27 budget request, which will be drafted entirely under Trump. It remains to be seen whether the White House will significantly raise the Pentagon's base budget or continue relying on congressional plus-ups or supplemental bills. The answer could have major implications for long-term military planning and modernization.
This dynamic is reminiscent of Trump’s first term, when he began his presidency with a $30 billion supplemental defense request, a small part of which had already been proposed by lawmakers. However, by the end of that term, Trump's budget projections had flattened out, leaving the Pentagon with no real-term growth. Time will tell if history repeats itself.
Where the Extra Money Is Going
Congress has proposed a total of $150 billion in defense-related reconciliation funds - again, the $113.3 billion increase in FY26 is contained within that figure. Lawmakers provided a general outline for the additional funding, including some of the following priorities: - $34 billion for shipbuilding and maritime industrial base improvements - $25 billion for the Golden Dome space-based defense initiative - $21 billion for munitions, including missile defense and counter-drone tech - $14 billion for fielding "game-changing" technologies, including attritable systems - $13 billion for nuclear modernization - $12 billion for readiness, including depot and shipyard improvements - $11 billion for Pacific deterrence - $7 billion for air superiority efforts, including the F-47 NGAD fighter and Collaborative Combat Aircraft
The Bigger Picture
The reconciliation funds are substantial investments, but they are also temporary. That's what has some lawmakers concerned. Sen. Wicker, a longtime advocate of sustained defense growth, has criticized the administration for leaning on reconciliation instead of raising the base budget. A base budget increase typically raises the floor for future budget requests, thereby offering a higher likely hood of increased long-term spending. On the other hand, supplemental adjustments, such as the reconciliation bill, don't offer the same predictability. Of course, Congress will still have an opportunity to revise the FY26 base budget during the markup process. Lawmakers were considering increasing the defense topline in F25, but those efforts were scrapped in a final continuing resolution. More clarity could come when detailed funding documents are released, which should include spending projections for the Pentagon's base budget. Until then, the trillion-dollar claim reflects a mix of marketing and reality. Trump’s defense budget might technically cross that threshold, but only by counting one-time reconciliation funding rather than a true increase to the base budget.
You have 0 item(s) in your cart
