link to page 2 link to page 2 
INSIGHTi
FY2024 NDAA: Summary of Funding
Authorizations
Updated December 29, 2023
Of the $910.8 billion requested in the FY2024 President’s budget for activities within the national defense
budget function, $874.2 billion fell within the scope of the proposed National Defense Authorization Act
for Fiscal Year 2024 (NDAA; H.R. 2670; S. 2226; P.L. 118-31). While the NDAA generally does not
provide funding (i.e., budget authority), historically the legislation has served as an indicator of
congressional views on funding for such activities.
During deliberation of the FY2024 NDAA, Congress debated whether to authorize more, the same, or less
funding than the President requested for such activities. The enacted version of the legislation authorized
$874.2 billion, as requested. Table 1 shows amounts authorized in the enacted FY2024 NDAA for DOD-
military activities (including by major appropriation title), atomic energy defense programs, and certain
other defense-related activities.
Including amounts for certain defense-related programs not within the purview of the legislation or
requiring additional authorization, the discretionary budget authority implication of the enacted FY2024
NDAA totaled $886.3 billion—consistent with the defense discretionary spending cap for FY2024 in P.L.
118-5 (137 Stat. 12).
Table 1. Summary of Funding Authorizations in FY2024 NDAA
(in billions of dollars of discretionary budget authority)
Title
FY2023
FY2024
House-passed
Senate-
FY2024
NDAA
President’s
NDAA (H.R.
passed
NDAA (P.L.
(P.L. 117-
budget
2670)
NDAA (S.
118-31)
263)
requesta
2226)
Procurement
$163.15
$167.99
$168.57
$169.84
$169.17
Research and Development
$138.86
$144.98
$145.21
$146.14
$145.94
Operation and Maintenance
$278.79
$290.07
$289.17
$291.75b
$288.82
Military Personnel
$172.02
$178.87
$178.63
$177.33
$176.77
Other Authorizations
$44.36
$42.60
$42.46
$42.60
$42.52
Congressional Research Service
https://crsreports.congress.gov
IN12209
CRS INSIGHT
Prepared for Members and
Committees of Congress
link to page 2 link to page 2 Congressional Research Service
2
Title
FY2023
FY2024
House-passed
Senate-
FY2024
NDAA
President’s
NDAA (H.R.
passed
NDAA (P.L.
(P.L. 117-
budget
2670)
NDAA (S.
118-31)
263)
requesta
2226)
Military Construction and Family
$19.49
$16.67
$17.47
$16.67
$18.17
Housing
Subtotal, Department of
$816.68
$841.19
$841.51
$844.34
$841.40
Defense-Military (051)
Atomic Energy Defense
$30.27
$32.65
$32.26
$32.47
$32.38
Programs (053)
Defense-Related Activities
$0.38
$0.38
$0.44
n/ac
$0.44
(054)
Total
$847.32
$874.21
$874.21
$876.81
$874.21
Source: U.S. Congress, House Committee on Armed Services, James M. Inhofe National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2023, Legislative Text and Joint Explanatory Statement to Accompany H.R. 7776, P.L. 117-263, Book 2 of 2,
committee print, 118th Congress, 1st sess., January 2023, 50-665, pp. 2168-2173; H.Rept. 118-125 accompanying H.R. 2670,
pp. 421-426; S.Rept. 118-58 accompanying S. 2226, pp. 400-403; and U.S. Congress, Conference Committee, National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2024, conference report to accompany H.R. 2670, 118th Cong., 1st sess., H.Rept.
118-301, December 6, 2023, pp. 1390-1395.
Note: Totals may not sum due to rounding. Dol ars rounded to nearest hundredth.
a. Amounts in this column reflect those in H.Rept. 118-301.
b. S.Rept. 118-58 included a higher requested amount for Air Force, Operation and Maintenance funding than H.Rept.
118-125 ($65.72 billion vs $62.75 bil ion).
c. The SASC typically does not authorize appropriations for the Department of Transportation Maritime Administration
Maritime Security Program and Tanker Security Program; however, the final version of the NDAA typically does.
House-passed NDAA (H.R. 2670)
H.R. 2670 would have authorized $874.2 billion—the level of funding the President’s budget requested
for activities within the scope of the legislation, according to the accompanying committee report
(H.Rept. 118-125). The bill would have authorized slightly more funding than requested for the U.S.
Department of Defense, or DOD; less funding than requested for atomic energy defense programs; and
more funding than requested for certain other defense-related activities.
During debate of H.R. 2670 in the HASC, Representative Rob Wittman, Chair of the Tactical Air and
Land Forces Subcommittee, said he supported an effort by Representative Mike Rogers, Chair of the
HASC, to align funding authorized by the legislation to the spending cap in the debt-limit deal negotiated
in part by Representative Kevin McCarthy, former Speaker of the House. Wittman said, “The overall debt
agreement enacted earlier this year, and the associated appropriations allocations, are the right medicine
to our rampant government spending. So, as I begin our debate today, I support Chairman Rogers’ defense
top line proposal, and Speaker McCarthy’s defense approach, to make sure that we rapidly access every
programmatic efficiency available.” Representative Barbara Lee proposed an amendment that would have
reduced the amount authorized by the bill by $100 billion, excluding accounts related to the Defense
Health Program, military personnel, and pay and benefits. In a statement, Representative Lee described
the amendment, which was not considered for debate, as an effort to “rein in Pentagon spending.”
Senate-passed NDAA (S. 2226)
S. 2226 would have authorized $876.8 billion—approximately the level the President’s budget requested
for activities within the scope of the legislation, after adjusting for a difference in the requested amount
for the Air Force, Operation and Maintenance account, according to the accompanying committee report
link to page 3 Congressional Research Service
3
(S.Rept. 118-58). The legislation would have authorized slightly more funding than requested for the
DOD and less funding than requested for atomic energy defense programs, including for defense uranium
enrichment decontamination and decommissioning. The committee report stated, “The committee
recommends an overall discretionary authorization of $886.3 billion in fiscal year 2024”—the level of the
defense discretionary spending cap for FY2024 in P.L. 118-5.
During debate of the bill in a closed session, SASC voted 12-13 opposing an amendment to “raise the
topline for implementation of the National Defense Strategy and for other purposes.” Senator Roger
Wicker, Ranking Member of SASC, reportedly filed the motion to increase funding authorized in the
legislation by $25 billion. On July 19, in remarks on the Senate floor, Senator Wicker said, “Ideally, we
would have an annual 3% to 5% boost to our topline above inflation.” Section 1004 of the legislation
included a Sense of the Senate provision on the need for emergency supplemental funding in FY2024.
The section stated, in part, “there are growing national security concerns that require additional funds
beyond the revised security spending limit, to include continued support to the Ukrainian armed forces,
additional munitions production, additional large surface combatants, shipbuilding industrial base
modernization investments, submarine industrial base and supply chain management, additional
production of wheeled and tracked combat vehicles, and emergent capabilities and exercises in the United
States Indo-Pacific Command.” Senator Elizabeth Warren, who opposed reporting the legislation to the
Senate, has described the FY2024 DOD budget request as “massive” and expressed concern that the
department’s unfunded priorities lists “distort our budget process.”
In Statements of Administration Policy on H.R. 2670 and S. 2223, the White House pledged to work with
Congress to set “appropriate and responsible levels of defense and non-defense spending to support the
security of the Nation consistent with the Fiscal Responsibility Act.”
Enacted NDAA (P.L. 118-31)
The enacted version of the FY2024 NDAA authorized $874.2 billion, as requested. In terms of DOD
titles, the legislation authorized more funding than requested for military construction and family housing;
procurement; and research, development, test, and evaluation; and less funding than requested for military
personnel; operation and maintenance; and other authorizations (e.g., National Defense Stockpile
Transaction Fund). The legislation authorized less funding than requested for atomic energy defense
programs, including for defense uranium enrichment decontamination and decommissioning; and more
funding than requested for certain other defense-related activities, including a program to provide DOD
access to commercial tanker vessels.
Table 2 shows the difference between requested and authorized funding in the NDAA over the past
decade.
Table 2. Requested and Authorized Funding in the National Defense Authorization Act,
FY2015-FY2024
(in billions of dollars of discretionary budget authority)
% Change
President’s Budget
(Authorized-
Fiscal Year
Public Law (P.L.)
Request
Authorized
Request)
2015
P.L. 113-291
$577.15
$577.15
0.0%
2016
P.L. 114-92
$604.21
$599.21
-0.8%
2017
P.L. 114-328
$607.98
$611.17
0.5%
2018
P.L. 115-91
$665.72
$692.10
4.0%
Congressional Research Service
4
2019
P.L. 115-232
$708.11
$708.10
0.0%
2020
P.L. 116-92
$741.93
$729.93
-1.6%
2021
P.L. 116-283
$731.61
$731.61
0.0%
2022
P.L. 117-81
$743.09
$768.21
3.4%
2023
P.L. 117-263
$802.36
$847.32
5.6%
2024
P.L. 118-31
$886.35
$886.35
0.0%
Source: CRS analysis of funding tables in conference reports or explanatory statements accompanying National Defense
Authorization Acts. Links to sources are embedded in figures.
Note: Dol ars rounded to nearest hundredth; percentages rounded to nearest tenth. The “% Change” column is the
percentage change between authorized and requested amounts.
Author Information
Brendan W. McGarry
Specialist in U.S. Defense Budget
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.
IN12209 · VERSION 5 · UPDATED