Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs: FY2025 Budget and Appropriations

Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs: FY2025 Budget and Appropriations

Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs: FY2025 Budget and Appropriations

Updated August 1, 2025 (R48231)
Jump to Main Text of Report

Contents

Overview

Emergency Funds

Mandatory Funds

Congressional Action

State Department Operations and Related Agency Funding

Title I: Department of State and Related Agency

Foreign Operations Funding

Title II: U.S. Agency for International Development

Title III: Bilateral Economic Assistance

Title IV: International Security Assistance

Title V: Multilateral Assistance

Title VI: Export and Investment Assistance

Outlook

Figures

Figure 1. International Affairs as a Portion of the Federal Budget, FY2025 Estimate

Figure 2. SFOPS Funding: FY2018-FY2025

Figure 3. Biden Administration FY2025 SFOPS Title I Request, by Funding Priority (Excluding Emergency Funding)

Figure 4. Embassy Security, Construction, and Maintenance Available Funding: FY2023 (actual) - FY2025 (request)

Figure 5. Foreign and Civil Service Direct Hire Funded Positions

Figure 6. Humanitarian Assistance Accounts: FY2023-FY2025

Figure 7. Non-Health Development and Transition Assistance Accounts: FY2023-FY2025

Figure 8. Security Assistance Accounts: FY2023-FY2025

Figure A-1. International Affairs Budget Components

Tables

Table 1. SFOPS Status, FY2025

Table 2. Diplomatic Security and Embassy Construction Annual Funding: FY2023-FY2025

Table 3. U.S. Payments of Assessments to International Organizations and Peacekeeping Missions Annual Funding, FY2023-FY2025

Table 4. Global Health Programs (GHP) Subaccounts: FY2023-FY2025

Table 5. Trump Administration Rescission Proposal and P.L. 119-28

Table A-1. Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs Appropriations: FY2024-FY2025

Table A-2. International Affairs Budget: FY2024-FY2025

Appendixes

Appendix. Supplementary Tables and Figures

Summary

Each year, Congress considers 12 distinct appropriations measures to fund federal programs and activities. One of these measures is the Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs (SFOPS) appropriations bill, which includes funding for U.S. diplomatic activities; cultural exchanges; development, security, and humanitarian assistance; and participation in multilateral organizations, among other international activities. For FY2025, the Biden Administration initially requested $64.03 billion in new budget authority for SFOPS accounts, or $63.04 billion when including proposed rescissions of prior-year funding. Of the proposed funding, $2.82 billion was requested with an emergency designation. On November 18, 2024, as part of a nearly $100 billion request for funds to address Hurricanes Helene and Milton and other natural disasters, the Administration proposed an additional $310 million for the International Boundary and Water Commission, an SFOPS account. This increased the Biden Administration's total FY2025 SFOPS request to date to $63.35 billion when factoring in proposed rescissions.

The FY2025 base request (not including the emergency-designated funding) represented a 6.7% increase from FY2024-enacted base appropriations (excluding emergency funding). The total request represented a 26.1% decrease from total FY2024-enacted appropriations. The Biden Administration prepared the FY2025 request prior to enactment of final FY2024 appropriations. Consistent with previous budget requests and annual SFOPS appropriations measures, the budget request divided SFOPS into two main components:

Department of State and Related Agency. These accounts, which are provided in Title I of the SFOPS bill, primarily support Department of State diplomatic and security activities. The initial FY2025 proposal included $18.47 billion for Title I accounts, representing a 5.9% increase from FY2024-enacted base appropriations and a 4.3% increase from total FY2024-enacted levels. When including the November proposal for emergency funding, the total request for Title I accounts for FY2025 was $18.78 billion, a 6.1% increase from total FY2024-enacted levels.

Foreign Operations and Related Programs. These accounts, which are provided in Titles II-VI of the SFOPS bill, fund most foreign assistance activities. The FY2025 request included a total of $45.56 billion for these in accounts, of which $2.82 billion was designated as emergency funding. The base request represented a 3.5% increase when compared with FY2024-enacted base levels; the total request represented a 35.2% decrease when compared with total FY2024-enacted levels.

On June 12, 2024, the House Appropriations Committee approved its version of the FY2025 SFOPS appropriations bill. The full House amended and approved the measure on June 28, 2024. The bill would have provided a total of $53.10 billion in new budget authority for SFOPS ($52.29 billion after rescissions). Of that total, the bill included $15.14 billion for Department of State and Related Agency accounts and $37.97 billion for Foreign Operations and Related Programs accounts.

On July 25, 2024, the Senate Appropriations Committee approved its FY2025 SFOPS appropriations measure, which would have provided $62.35 billion in new budget authority for SFOPS ($62.18 billion after rescissions). Of that total, the bill included $17.60 billion for Department of State and Related Agency accounts and $44.75 billion for Foreign Operations and Related Programs accounts, of which $5.90 billion was designated as emergency funding.

On September 26, 2024, P.L. 118-83, a continuing resolution (CR) to fund federal government agencies in FY2025, largely at FY2024 levels, was enacted, extending funding through December 20, 2024. On December 21, the President signed P.L. 118-158; the law included a CR funding federal government agencies in FY2025 through March 14, 2025, and disaster relief including $250 million for the International Boundary and Water Commission, among other matters.

On March 15, 2025, President Trump signed into law P.L. 119-4, the Full-Year Continuing Appropriations and Extensions Act, 2025. The measure funds federal government agencies for FY2025, largely at FY2024 levels. For SFOPS and selected other appropriations measures, this is the first full-year CR since FY2013.

On July 24, 2025, President Trump signed into law P.L. 119-28, the FY2024 rescissions law. The measure rescinds a total of $7.67 billion in FY2025 SFOPS funding appropriated in P.L. 119-4 across a range of accounts, and an additional $236.3 million in prior year funding. When taking into account the rescissions package, the total SFOPS appropriation for FY2025 represents a 10.8% decrease from FY2024 SFOPS funding provided in P.L. 118-47. When including emergency funding enacted for FY2024 in P.L. 118-50, the FY2025 total enacted level represents a 38.9% decrease from total enacted SFOPS funding for FY2024.

Table A-1 provides an account-by-account comparison of the FY2025 request to FY2024- and FY2023-enacted funding levels. Table A-2 offers a similar comparison focused specifically on the International Affairs budget (Function 150). Both appendices will be updated to reflect congressional action. Figure A-1 depicts the International Affairs budget account structure.

This report tracks SFOPS budget requests and appropriations, comparing funding levels for accounts and purposes. It does not provide extensive analysis of international affairs policy issues. For in-depth analysis and contextual information on international affairs issues, consult the wide range of CRS reports on specific subjects, such as global health, diplomatic security, and U.S. participation in the United Nations. For more information on SFOPS accounts, see CRS Report R40482, Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs Appropriations: A Guide to Component Accounts, by Cory R. Gill and Emily M. McCabe.

Overview

Annual Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs (SFOPS) appropriations support a range of U.S. activities around the world. These include the operation of U.S. embassies; diplomatic activities; international development, security, and humanitarian assistance; U.S. participation in multilateral organizations; and U.S. export promotion activities; among others. The SFOPS appropriation closely aligns with the International Affairs budget function (150), which typically represents about 1% of the annual federal budget (Figure 1).¹

Figure 1. International Affairs as a Portion of the Federal Budget, FY2025 Estimate

Source: Prepared by CRS using Office of Management and Budget FY2025 Budget Historical Table 5.1.

The Biden Administration's initial budget request for FY2025 proposed $64.03 billion in new budget authority for SFOPS appropriations accounts, or $63.04 billion when including proposed rescissions of prior year funding.² Of the requested funding, $2.82 billion was requested as emergency funding. The base request, including rescissions, represented a 6.7% increase from FY2024-enacted base funding, which does not include $2.50 billion in emergency SFOPS funds enacted as part of the FY2024 Further Consolidated Appropriations Act (Division F of P.L. 118-47) or the $26.81 billion in emergency supplemental SFOPS funds enacted as part of the FY2024 National Security Supplemental Appropriations Act (P.L. 118-50).

On November 18, 2024, as part of a nearly $100 billion request for funds to address Hurricanes Helene and Milton and other natural disasters, the Administration proposed $310 million for the International Boundary and Water Commission, an SFOPS account.³ Including emergency funding from both the initial and November requests, the Administration's total request of $63.35 billion represented a 26.1% reduction from total FY2024-enacted funding.

Emergency Funds

Over the past decade, Congress has annually appropriated funding designated as "emergency" that is not bound by preestablished budget caps. Congress has directed such funding for a range of activities, including those considered in the regular budget cycle as well as unanticipated global crises. Funds have been provided through annual appropriations bills and off-cycle supplemental measures. For FY2024, for example, Congress enacted emergency funding for SFOPS accounts in both the regular appropriation (Division F of P.L. 118-47) and an emergency supplemental measure (Divisions A, B, and C of P.L. 118-50). The emergency supplemental funding was primarily to support Israel, Ukraine, and activities in the Indo-Pacific.

Emergency designated funding for SFOPS accounts has fluctuated from year to year, at times accounting for a large portion of total annual SFOPS appropriations (Figure 2). Since FY2016, the years for which emergency funding accounted for the highest percentage of total SFOPS funding are FY2017 (36.1%), FY2022 (34.2%), and FY2024 (34.2%).

Figure 2. SFOPS Funding: FY2018-FY2025

Sources: Prepared by CRS using annual Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs Congressional Budget Justifications (CBJs); Letter from President Joseph R. Biden to Speaker of the House Mike Johnson; P.L. 117-180; P.L. 117-328; P.L. 118-47; P.L. 118-50; P.L. 119-4; P.L. 119-28. Emergency-OCO reflects a designation used from FY2012-FY2021 for Overseas Contingency Operations, per the Budget Control Act of 2011. For more on OCO, see CRS In Focus IF10143, Foreign Affairs Overseas Contingency Operations (OCO) Funding: Background and Current Status, by Emily M. McCabe.

Notes: Actual = actual obligation totals as reported in the CBJs. Enacted = the amount appropriated in the annual SFOPS bill.

For FY2025, the Biden Administration included in its initial request $2.82 billion in emergency designated funding: $350.0 million for Assistance for Europe, Eurasia, and Central Asia; $1.09 billion for International Disaster Assistance; and $1.37 billion for Migration and Refugee Assistance. The Administration did not make clear why it requested such funds with the emergency designation.

In November 2024, the Administration transmitted to Congress a proposal for disaster assistance funding. As part of that request, the Administration proposed an additional $310 million for SFOPS for the International Boundary and Water Commission. According to the request, the proposed funds "would be used to address the need for additional water infrastructure to prevent and reduce sewage flows and contamination in Southern California through support for ongoing design and construction at the South Bay International Wastewater Treatment Plant and related infrastructure."⁴

The FY2025-enacted total includes $2.75 billion in emergency funding, including $250 million for the IBWC and $2.50 billion in Foreign Operations accounts carried over from FY2024 in P.L. 119-4.

Mandatory Funds

The majority of funding for SFOPS accounts is discretionary spending, meaning the amount of budget authority available is determined in annual appropriations measures.⁵ The consistent exception to this has been the annual Payment to the Foreign Service Retirement and Disability Fund funded through Title I. This amount is considered to be mandatory spending because the amount of budget authority necessary is determined by statutory requirements outside the jurisdiction or control of the House and Senate Appropriations Committees.

For the past three fiscal years, the Biden Administration has proposed mandatory budget authority for other select initiatives. For FY2025, the Administration requested $7 billion in mandatory budget authority for two purposes:⁶

To "out-compete" China, including $2.00 billion over five years for an International Infrastructure Fund that would "advance strategic 'hard' infrastructure projects, particularly for projects that align with U.S. national security and economic interests in countries that are vulnerable to malign influence by strategic competitors";⁷ and $2.00 billion over five years to advance the Indo-Pacific Strategy. The Administration asserted that providing the mandatory budget authority for such investments would "demonstrate sustained, long-term U.S. commitment to partners and ensure these necessary long-term, strategic investments have a reliable, consistent source of funding."⁸

To support the Green Climate Fund's Second Replenishment with $3.00 billion over four years. This level matches the United States pledge for the Second Replenishment; other donor countries have pledged a cumulative $9.73 billion.

Congress largely did not accept the Administration's FY2023 and FY2024 requests for mandatory budget authority within SFOPS' jurisdiction.⁹ As of this writing, Congress has not acted on the FY2025 request for mandatory budget authority.

Congressional Action

Table 1. SFOPS Status, FY2025

302(b) Allocations

Committee Action

Floor Action

Conference/
Agreement

Final

Rescission

House

Senate

House

Senate

House

Senate

House

Senate

07/11/24

06/12/24

07/25/24

06/28/24

03/15/25

07/24/25

S.Rept. 118-190; Revisions in S.Rept. 118-197 and S.Rept. 118-203

H.R. 8771

H.Rept. 118-554

S. 4797

S.Rept. 118-200

H.R. 8771

P.L. 119-4

P.L. 119-28

Source: For more on appropriations status, see CRS Appropriations Status Table, Appropriations Status Table: FY1999 to Present, by Justin Murray.

Notes: 302(b) Allocations refer to the House and Senate Appropriations Committees' allocation of spending authority to their respective subcommittees, pursuant to Section 302(b) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974. For more on 302(b) allocations, see CRS Report R47388, Enforceable Spending Allocations in the Congressional Budget Process: 302(a)s and 302(b)s, by Drew C. Aherne.

House Legislation. H.R. 8771 (118th Congress) would have provided a total of $53.10 billion in new budget authority for SFOPS accounts ($52.29 billion after rescissions), of which $15.14 billion would have been for Department of State and Related Agency accounts and $37.97 billion for Foreign Operations and Related Programs accounts.¹⁰

Senate Legislation. S. 4797 (118th Congress) would have provided a total of $62.35 billion in new budget authority for SFOPS accounts ($62.18 billion after rescissions), of which $5.90 billion would have been designated as emergency funding.¹¹ Of the total, $17.60 billion would have been for Department of State and Related Agency accounts and $44.75 billion for Foreign Operations and Related Programs accounts. All proposed emergency funding would have been for select bilateral economic assistance (Title III) and security assistance (Title IV) accounts.

Continuing Resolutions. On September 26, 2024, P.L. 118-83, a continuing resolution (CR) to fund federal government agencies in FY2025, largely at FY2024 levels, was enacted, extending funding through December 20, 2024. On December 21, the President signed P.L. 118-158; the law included a CR funding federal government agencies in FY2025 through March 14, 2025, and disaster relief including $250 million for the International Boundary and Water Commission, among other matters. On March 15, 2025, the President signed into law P.L. 119-4, the Full-Year Continuing Appropriations and Extensions Act, 2025. The measure funds federal government agencies—including those provided for in SFOPS—for FY2025, largely at FY2024 levels.¹²

Rescissions. On July 24, 2025, the President signed into law P.L. 119-28, a rescissions package that included $7.67 billion in rescissions of FY2025 SFOPS funding across a range of accounts. When taking into account the rescinded funds, the total SFOPS appropriation for FY2025 is $52.39 billion, which is 17.3% lower than President Biden's request and 11.2% lower than what was appropriated for SFOPS for FY2024 in P.L. 118-47. When including emergency supplemental funding enacted for FY2024 in P.L. 118-50, the total SFOPS appropriation for FY2025 is 38.9% lower than total enacted SFOPS funding for FY2024.

State Department Operations and Related Agency Funding

Title I: Department of State and Related Agency

The Department of State and Related Agency title provides funding for the State Department's internal operations and many non-foreign assistance programs, including most Foreign Service and Civil Service personnel salaries, diplomatic security and embassy construction, U.S. assessed contributions (membership dues) to international organizations and international peacekeeping missions, and public diplomacy and cultural exchanges. The U.S. Agency for Global Media (USAGM), an independent federal agency supervising civilian U.S. government-funded international broadcasting to foreign publics, is the "Related Agency" Congress funds under this title. The Biden Administration's initial FY2025 request for the Title I accounts totaled $18.47 billion, or 5.9% more than the $17.44 billion Congress provided for these accounts in FY2024 (excluding emergency funding). The Biden Administration's total FY2025 Title I request, which included an additional $310 million in emergency funding the Administration requested in November 2024 for the International Boundary and Water Commission (IBWC), equaled $18.78 billion, or 6.1% more than the total FY2024-enacted level (including emergency supplemental funding). For a full listing of the Title I accounts and recent proposed and actual funding levels, see Table A-1.

House Legislation. The House-passed legislation (H.R. 8771, 118th Congress) would have provided $15.14 billion for the Title I accounts, or 18.1% less than the Administration's initial request and 13.2% less than the FY2024 base funding Congress provided. The House passed this measure prior to the Biden Administration's November 2024 request for an additional $310 million for the IBWC.

Senate Legislation. The Senate Appropriations Committee-approved legislation (S. 4797, 118th Congress) would have provided $17.60 billion for Title I, or 4.7% less than the Administration's initial request and 1.0% more than the FY2024 base funding level. The Senate Appropriations Committee reported this measure prior to the Administration's November 2024 request for an additional $310.0 million for the IBWC.

Emergency Funding. President Biden signed P.L. 118-158 on December 21, 2024. In addition to a CR funding the State Department and other federal agencies in FY2025 through March 14, 2025, this law included $250.0 million for the IBWC, or 19.4% less than the $310.0 million in emergency funding the Administration requested.

Continuing Resolution. P.L. 119-4 contains several anomalies related to budget authority provided for Title I accounts. For example, such anomalies

decrease the appropriation for the IBWC's construction activities from $156.1 million in P.L. 118-47 to $78.0 million for FY2025 (this provision does not affect the additional $250.0 million in emergency funding provided for IBWC construction in P.L. 118-158);¹³

zeros out funding for the Commission on Reform and Modernization of the Department of State for FY2025, which received $2 million for FY2024;¹⁴

reduces the rescission of Consular and Border Security Programs account funds from $902.3 million in FY2024 to $375.0 million in FY2025;¹⁵ and

grants the State Department discretion in FY2025 to provide the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction (SIGAR) less than the $24.84 million from the Office of Inspector General account that it was required to provide SIGAR in FY2024.¹⁶

Other Title I anomalies are described elsewhere in this report. When factoring in all such anomalies, P.L. 119-4 includes $17.22 billion in non-emergency funding for the Title I accounts (this figure excludes emergency funding provided for the IBWC in P.L. 118-158). This totals 1.2% less than FY2024-enacted funding for these accounts (excluding emergency funding) and 6.8% less than the Biden Administration's FY2025 non-emergency funding request.

Rescissions. P.L. 119-28 included $341.7 million in rescissions of FY2025 funding across three Title I accounts: $168.8 million from Contributions to International Organizations, $157.9 million from Contributions for International Peacekeeping Activities, and $15.0 million from the U.S. Institute of Peace. These bring the total Title I funding for FY2025 to $17.13 billion, 1.7% less than FY2024-enacted funding for these accounts (excluding emergency funding) and 7.3% less than the Biden Administration's FY2025 non-emergency funding request. When including emergency funding, total Title I funding for FY2025 is 3.3% less than the total enacted for FY2024.

Figure 3. Biden Administration FY2025 SFOPS Title I Request, by Funding Priority (Excluding Emergency Funding)

(Total request: $18.47 billion)

Source: FY2025 SFOPS Congressional Budget Justification; CRS calculation.

Notes: DP = Diplomatic Programs account. "Ongoing Operations" funds the operating budgets of most of the State Department's regional, functional, and managerial bureaus; diplomatic engagement to advance U.S. national security and foreign policy interests on matters including sanctions enforcement and arms control; public diplomacy programs; and salaries of many of the State Department's Foreign and Civil Service personnel. It encompasses the Human Resources (excluding Worldwide Security Protection, or WSP, American Salaries), Overseas Programs, and Diplomatic Policy & Support funding allocations under the DP account, along with a small share of the Security Programs allocation. It is distinct from the WSP funding category, which is described in the following subsection.

Diplomatic Security and Embassy Construction

The Worldwide Security Protection (WSP) allocation within the Diplomatic Programs account and the Embassy Security, Construction, and Maintenance (ESCM) account are also known as the SFOPS "diplomatic security accounts." WSP is the primary operating appropriation for the Bureau of Diplomatic Security, which is principally responsible for security operations including a worldwide guard force protecting the State Department's overseas diplomatic posts, residences, and domestic offices.¹⁷ ESCM funds the Bureau of Overseas Buildings Operations, which provides U.S. diplomatic and consular missions abroad with secure, safe, and functional facilities.¹⁸ Congress has long provided budget authority for both WSP and ESCM on either a multiyear or no-year basis. Such action allows the State Department to retain unobligated appropriated funds for several years after the fiscal year for which they were appropriated or, in the case of no-year appropriations, indefinitely. Therefore, the annual appropriations Congress provides for WSP and ESCM constitute only a share of all available funding for these accounts at any point in time. For additional detail with respect to ESCM, see Figure 4.

Figure 4. Embassy Security, Construction, and Maintenance Available Funding: FY2023 (actual) - FY2025 (request)

(In millions of current U.S. dollars; includes emergency funds)

Source: White House, Office of Management and Budget, Budget of the U.S. Government Fiscal Year 2025, Appendix, p. 753, at https://www.govinfo.gov/app/details/BUDGET-2025-APP. This figure illustrates the most recently available data as of the date of publication of this report. Updated data on unobligated balances carried forward in FY2025 may be included in the Trump Administration's comprehensive FY2026 budget request.

Note: Information at this level of detail was unavailable for Worldwide Security Protection in the President's budget justification documents.

The Biden Administration's request included a combined $5.84 billion for the diplomatic security accounts (see Table 2). If enacted, this would have totaled 1.2% more than the base funding Congress provided for the accounts in FY2024. For WSP, the Administration's priorities included protecting the U.S. overseas presence in Iraq (for which $747.7 million was requested) and the potential resumption of a physical U.S. diplomatic presence in Libya for the first time since 2014 (for which $44.5 million was requested).¹⁹ With regard to ESCM, the request included $871.9 million in State Department funding for the Capital Security Cost Sharing (CSCS) and Maintenance Cost Sharing (MCS) Programs, which fund the planning, design, construction, and maintenance of U.S. overseas posts.²⁰ When accounting for further contributions from consular fees and other agencies with personnel assigned to U.S. embassies and other overseas posts, the Administration's total request for these programs was $2.22 billion.²¹

Table 2. Diplomatic Security and Embassy Construction Annual Funding:
FY2023-FY2025

(In millions of current U.S. dollars; includes emergency funds)

Account

FY2023 Enacted

FY2024 Enacted

FY2025 Request

FY2025 House

FY2025 Senate

FY2025 Enacted

Worldwide Security Protection

3,813.71

3,913.71

3,928.71

3,928.71

3,890.71

3,813.71

Embassy Security, Construction & Maintenance

1,957.82

1,957.82

1,907.07

1,957.82

1,907.07

1,957.82

Total

5,771.53

5,871.53

5,835.78

5,886.53

5,797.78

5,771.53

Source: FY2025 SFOPS Congressional Budget Justification; CRS calculations; P.L. 118-47; P.L. 118-50; P.L. 119-4; H.R. 8771 (118th Congress); S. 4797 (118th Congress).

Notes: Figures exclude rescissions. Percentage changes may differ from numbers included in this table due to rounding.

The FY2024 Enacted column includes emergency supplemental funding from the Israel Security Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2024, the Ukraine Security Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2024, and the Indo-Pacific Security Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2024 (Divisions A-C of P.L. 118-50).

House Legislation. H.R. 8771 (118th Congress), the House-approved legislation, would have provided $5.89 billion for the diplomatic security accounts, or 0.9% more than the Administration requested. H.R. 8771 did not include any language endorsing the Biden Administration's WSP funding priorities regarding Libya and Iraq, but it also would not have prohibited the Administration from funding these priorities. The committee report accompanying the bill indicated that it would have provided $906.6 million for CSCS/MCS, or 4.0% more than the Administration's request for these programs.²²

Senate Legislation. The Senate committee-approved measure, S. 4797 (118th Congress), would have provided $5.80 billion for the diplomatic security accounts, or 0.7% less than the Administration's request. The committee report accompanying this bill indicated that the bill would have provided sufficient funding for the State Department to re-establish a U.S. diplomatic presence in Libya. The report further called on the State Department to prioritize doing so.²³ Like the House legislation, the Senate bill did not directly address the Biden Administration's Iraq-related WSP funding priorities. The committee report stated that the bill included $871.9 million for CSCS/MCS, which equaled the Administration's request.²⁴

Continuing Resolution. P.L. 119-4 contains one anomaly related to budget authority provided for the diplomatic security accounts. This anomaly stipulates that Section 7004(e) of P.L. 118-47, which withheld $100 million in Diplomatic Programs account funding (this account includes WSP) from obligation until the Secretary of State took specified actions related to diplomatic security and embassy construction, does not apply to budget authority provided for this account in FY2025.²⁵ This anomaly does not affect overall funding levels for either of the diplomatic security accounts. Total funding for these accounts in FY2025 is $5.77 billion, which equals the FY2024 non-emergency funding level (this funding level excludes $100 million Congress provided for WSP in P.L. 118-50) and is 1.1% less than the Biden Administration's request.

Assessed Contributions to International Organizations and Peacekeeping Missions

The Contributions to International Organizations (CIO) account funds the United States' payments of its annual assessed contributions (membership dues) to 44 international organizations. These include the United Nations (UN) and organizations in the UN system (such as the World Health Organization, or WHO) and regional organizations including the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO).²⁶ Separately, the United States pays its assessed contributions to 10 UN peacekeeping missions through the Contributions for International Peacekeeping Activities (CIPA) account.²⁷ The United States provides additional funding to international organizations through various SFOPS humanitarian and multilateral assistance accounts.

The Biden Administration's combined FY2025 request for CIO and CIPA totaled $2.91 billion. This request was nearly identical to the aggregate FY2024 funding Congress provided for these accounts. However, the Administration's CIO request totaled about $133 million (or 8.6%) more than the FY2024 funding level for that account, while its CIPA request was around $133 million (or 9.7%) less than the FY2024 funding level. For more detail, see Table 3.

Table 3. U.S. Payments of Assessments to International Organizations and Peacekeeping Missions Annual Funding, FY2023-FY2025

(In millions of current U.S. dollars)

Account

FY2023 Enacted

FY2024 Enacted

FY2025 Request

FY2025 House

FY2025 Senate

FY2025 Enacted

Contributions to International Organizations

1,438.00

1,543.45

1,676.69

269.61

1,676.69

1,374.61

Contributions for International Peacekeeping Activities

1,481.92

1,367.41

1,234.14

1,068.90

1,234.14

1,076.24

Total

2,919.92

2,910.86

2,910.83

1,338.51

2,910.83

2,450.85

Sources: FY2025 SFOPS Congressional Budget Justification; CRS calculations; P.L. 118-47; P.L. 119-4; P.L. 119-28; H.R. 8771 (118th Congress); S. 4797 (118th Congress).

Notes: Percentage changes may differ from numbers included in this table due to rounding.

The Biden Administration's FY2025 CIO request included $75 million to pay the United States' annual assessment to the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) and an additional $25 million to pay a share of U.S. arrears (overdue assessed contributions) to that organization.²⁸ The United States began accumulating these arrears in 2011, as UNESCO's decision to grant membership as a state to the Palestinians that year triggered U.S. laws prohibiting funding to UN entities that took such action. While the United States withdrew from UNESCO in 2018, it later rejoined the organization in July 2023 after the Biden Administration exercised authority provided by Congress to waive these funding restrictions.²⁹

With regard to CIPA, the Biden Administration's request assumed that U.S. contributions to UN peacekeeping missions would remain consistent with the 25% statutory cap on the U.S. share of global contributions to such missions.³⁰ Congress has maintained this cap since 1994 due to concerns that UN-assessed rates for U.S. payments are too high.³¹ The UN assesses the U.S. share of UN peacekeeping at 26.2%. Therefore, the Biden Administration projected that the United States would continue to accumulate arrears reflecting the gap between the UN rate of assessment and actual U.S. dues payments.³² The United States has accumulated over $1 billion in arrears since FY2017.³³ While the Biden Administration requested that Congress provide it requisite funding to pay peacekeeping dues at the UN rate of assessment in previous budget cycles, Congress refrained from doing so.³⁴

House Legislation. H.R. 8771 (118th Congress) would have provided a combined $1.34 billion for CIO and CIPA, or 54.0% less than the Administration's request. The House committee report sought to allocate all of the $269.6 million the bill would have provided for CIO to six international organizations, none of which were UNESCO.³⁵ The bill also would have prohibited funding to the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA) and the WHO.³⁶ For CIPA, the committee report called on the State Department to engage with the United Nations to "prioritize efforts to cap United States assessments for peacekeeping operations at 25 percent."³⁷

Senate Legislation. S. 4797 (118th Congress) would have provided $2.91 billion in total funding for CIO and CIPA, which equaled the Administration's request. If enacted, this measure would have provided resources for the State Department to pay the United States' annual assessment to UNESCO and a share of U.S. arrears, as envisioned in the budget request. Although this bill would not have banned U.S. funding to the WHO like the House bill, the committee report would have required the Secretary of State to brief Congress on efforts to promote reforms at the WHO, including those "tied to increases in assessed contributions."³⁸ The committee report accompanying this bill expressed concern that the accrual of U.S. arrears to peacekeeping missions funded through CIPA "undermines U.S. credibility and influence at the UN, particularly at a time when the [People's Republic of China] is actively increasing its financial, human resources, and political influence in the UN system."³⁹

Continuing Resolution. P.L. 119-4 includes no anomalies related to CIO and one anomaly related to CIPA. This anomaly reduces funding for CIPA from $1.37 billion for FY2024 to $1.23 billion for FY2025.⁴⁰ The law provides a combined $2.78 billion for CIO and CIPA, which totals about 4.6% less than both FY2024-enacted funding and the Biden Administration's FY2025 request.

Rescissions. P.L. 119-28 includes a $168.8 million rescission to FY2025 CIO funding and a $157.9 million rescission to FY2025 CIPA funding. Including these rescissions, total funding for CIO and CIPA for FY2025 is $2.45 billion, which totals about 15.8% less than both FY2024-enacted funding and the Biden Administration's request for FY2025.

State Department Workforce

In October 2021, then-Secretary of State Antony Blinken launched the State Department's "Modernization Agenda." The Modernization Agenda's stated intent was to ensure that the State Department was "strong, effective, diverse, and flexible enough to lead America's engagement in the world."⁴¹ The Biden Administration's FY2025 budget request sought to advance several of the Administration's goals linked with the Modernization Agenda. These included increasing the size of the Foreign Service and reducing Foreign Service vacancies, expanding the Training and Development Float ("training float," or share of employees participating in training and professional development programs rather than serving in policy assignments, which currently totals around 250 employees), and strengthening Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, and Accessibility (DEIA) programs.⁴²

Congress provides funding for most Foreign and Civil Service personnel salaries, along with State Department human resources management programs, through the Human Resources funding category of the Diplomatic Programs account (hereinafter "Human Resources"). The Biden Administration requested about $3.90 billion for Human Resources for FY2025, or 16.8% more than the $3.34 billion Congress provided in FY2024. This request included salaries for a combined 29,586 Foreign and Civil Service personnel (including personnel whose salaries are funded through accounts other than Diplomatic Programs), which was 202 more positions than Congress funded in FY2023 (the most recent year for which such data are available; for additional detail see Figure 5).⁴³ The State Department sought to create new positions focused on increasing strategic engagement in the Indo-Pacific and competing with China (for which 50 new positions were requested), strengthening the State Department's strategic and managerial functions (for which 27 new positions were requested), and increasing the size of the training float (for which 10 new positions were requested), among other areas.⁴⁴ Further, the Biden Administration sought $73.6 million to implement the State Department's DEIA programming, or 5.6% above the $69.7 million in funding for such programs in FY2023 (the most recent fiscal year for which such data are available).⁴⁵ The budget request stated that the majority of this funding increase was intended to expand accessibility and reasonable accommodations for the State Department's workforce.⁴⁶

Figure 5. Foreign and Civil Service Direct Hire Funded Positions

Source: State Department, FY2025 Congressional Budget Justification, Department of State Diplomatic Engagement, Appendix 1, pp. 15-16. This figure illustrates the most recently available data as of the date of publication of this report. Updated data may be included in the Trump Administration's comprehensive FY2026 budget request.

House Legislation. The House-approved legislation, H.R. 8771 (118th Congress), did not include a specific total allocation for Human Resources. If enacted, this would have allowed the State Department to determine an appropriate allocation from available resources made available for the Diplomatic Programs account. However, the committee report included a $688.8 million Human Resources allocation for security personnel funded under the WSP funding category, which equaled the Administration's request.⁴⁷ As H.R. 8771 would have provided $1.7 billion less for the Diplomatic Programs account than the Biden Administration requested, this bill, if enacted, may have precluded the Administration from implementing all of the hiring initiatives detailed in its request. H.R. 8771 would have also prohibited the Administration from using funds to implement several executive orders President Biden issued pertaining to DEIA or, as described in the bill, to fund "diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives, training, programs, offices, officers, policies, or other executive agency functions."⁴⁸

Senate Legislation. S. 4797 (118th Congress), the Senate committee-approved bill, would have provided a $3.53 billion allocation for Human Resources, which was about 9.5% less than the Administration's request. Of such funding, $686.8 million would have been for security personnel funded under WSP, which was slightly below the $688.8 million included in both the Administration's request and the House-approved legislation. Although the bill may not have provided requisite funding for the Biden Administration to implement all of the hiring initiatives detailed in its request, the committee report maintained that the bill sought to increase funding and provide enhanced support to the U.S. diplomatic workforce.⁴⁹ The committee report further recommended funding to support continued implementation of both the training float and DEIA programs, although it did not specify funding levels.⁵⁰

Continuing Resolution. P.L. 119-4 does not contain any anomalies directly related to Human Resources and WSP salaries funding within the Diplomatic Programs account. FY2025 funding for Human Resources totals $3.34 billion, including $684.8 million for WSP salaries. These figures are identical to FY2024 funding levels and total 14.4% less than the Biden Administration's FY2025 request. P.L. 119-4 does not address State Department DEIA programming. In the past, Congress largely refrained from providing line-item appropriations for such programming. This practice granted the State Department discretion to allocate funding for these programs, which it did so primarily from the Diplomatic Programs account.

Reduction in Force. In early July 2025, the State Department initiated a reduction-in-force (RIF) reportedly affecting approximately 1,350 employees.⁵¹ This action is consistent with President Trump's February 11 executive order, which directed federal agencies, including the State Department, to develop agency reorganization plans by March 13, 2025, and prepare to "initiate large-scale reductions in force (RIFs), consistent with applicable law."⁵² It remains unclear what, if any, budgetary implications the RIF may have for FY2025.

Foreign Operations Funding⁵³

Title II: U.S. Agency for International Development

Title II provides funding for USAID's administrative accounts, including the Operating Expenses (OE), Capital Investment Fund, and Office of Inspector General (OIG) accounts.⁵⁴ For FY2025, the budget request included a total of $2.22 billion for the three accounts, representing a 9.1% increase compared with enacted base funding for the accounts for FY2024. The priorities for such funding included increasing USAID U.S. Direct Hire staff by 145 positions (75 Civil Service and 70 Foreign Service) and investing in cybersecurity.⁵⁵

House Legislation. The House-passed legislation, H.R. 8771 (118th Congress), would have provided $1.56 billion for the three accounts, representing a 23.3% decrease from FY2024-enacted base funding for the three accounts. The proposed level was 29.7% lower than the proposed funding in the FY2025 request. The greatest reduction would have been for the OE account, which would have seen a 28.3% reduction from FY2024-enacted base funding and would have been 34.8% lower than the proposed FY2025 level. The report accompanying the measure stated that while the committee recognized the "need for more contracting officers and agreement officers within USAID to facilitate faster execution of contracts and agreements and conduct more responsible oversight, the Committee notes that USAID has not presented a persuasive case on how more funding for staff will lead to stronger assistance outcomes."⁵⁶

Senate Legislation. S. 4797 (118th Congress), the Senate Appropriations Committee-approved measure, would have provided $2.11 billion for the three accounts, which would have represented a 3.4% increase from FY2024-enacted base funding for the three accounts. The proposed level was 5.2% lower than the Administration's request for FY2025.

Continuing Resolution. P.L. 119-4 does not contain anomalies related to the Title II accounts. Total funding for FY2025 for Title II accounts therefore is $2.04 billion; this amount is the same as FY2024 base funding and 8.3% less than what the Biden Administration proposed.

Rescission. P.L. 119-28 includes a $125.0 million rescission for USAID's Operating Expenses. This brings total funding for Title II accounts to $1.91 billion. This amount is a 6.1% reduction from FY2024 base funding and 13.9% less than the Biden Administration's proposal. When including emergency supplemental funding enacted for FY2024, total Title II funding for FY2025 is 8.5% lower than total enacted FY2024 funding.

Title III: Bilateral Economic Assistance

The bilateral assistance title provides funding for bilateral foreign assistance programs (excluding security assistance), independent agencies, and select Department of the Treasury programs. In sum, for FY2025, the Administration requested $29.69 billion for Title III accounts, of which $2.82 billion would have been designated as emergency funding. The base level represented a 1.3% decrease from FY2024-enacted base appropriations for such accounts. Including the emergency funding, the total represented a 38.1% decrease from total enacted Title III funding for FY2024. Title III accounts are explored in greater detail in the sections below.

House Legislation. The House-passed legislation would have provided a total of $23.80 billion for Title III accounts. The proposed base level would have represented a 12.6% reduction from FY2024-enacted base appropriations and was 19.8% lower than the President's total request for such accounts.

Senate Legislation. The Senate Appropriations Committee-approved legislation would have provided a total of $29.73 billion for Title III accounts, of which $3.72 billion would have been designated as emergency funding. Compared with FY2024-enacted base funding for the accounts, the proposed base funding for FY2025 would have been reduced by 4.4%. When including the emergency-designated funds, the total amount provided for Title III accounts in the measure would have been 38.0% lower than the total enacted for such accounts in FY2024 but was 0.1% higher than the Administration's total proposal for FY2025.

Continuing Resolution. P.L. 119-4 contains one anomaly related to budget authority provided for Title III accounts: a reduction of $16.0 million for the Department of the Treasury Debt Restructuring account. Total funding for FY2025 for Title III accounts therefore is $29.32 billion, 0.1% less than FY2024 funding enacted in P.L. 118-47 and 1.2% less than what the Biden Administration proposed.

Rescissions. P.L. 119-28 includes $6.64 billion in rescissions of FY2025 Title III funding, spread across multiple accounts (detailed in the sections below). These bring total funding for Title III accounts to $22.57 billion, 23.1% less than funding enacted in P.L. 118-47 and 24.0% less than the Biden Administration's proposal. When including emergency supplemental funding enacted for FY2024, total Title III funding for FY2025 is 53.0% lower than total enacted FY2024 funding.

Global Health Programs

The Biden Administration proposed a 2.0% reduction for the Global Health Programs (GHP) account in FY2025 compared with the FY2024-enacted level. The proposed reduction was largely due to a smaller proposed U.S. contribution to the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria (Global Fund) for FY2025. Most other GHP subaccounts would have seen level or increased funding under the request for FY2025 (Table 4).

Table 4. Global Health Programs (GHP) Subaccounts: FY2023-FY2025

(In millions of current U.S. dollars)

FY2023 Enacted

FY2024 Enacted

FY2025 Request

FY2025 House

FY2025 Senate

FY2025 Enacted

HIV/AIDS (State)

4,395.0

4,395.0

4,395.0

4,395.0

4,395.0

4,395.0

Global Fund

2,000.0

1,650.0

1,191.6

1,250.0

1,200.0

1,650.0

Global Health Security-State

—

—

250.0

—

250.0

—

Total, GHP-State

6,395.0

6,045.0

5,836.6

5,645.0

5,845.0

6,045.0

HIV/AIDS (USAID)

330.0

330.0

330.0

330.0

330.0

330.0

Tuberculosis

394.5

394.5

394.5

394.5

394.5

394.5

Malaria

795.0

795.0

795.0

800.0

795.0

795.0

Maternal and Child Health

910.0

915.0

940.0

915.0

940.0

915.0

Nutrition

160.0

165.0

160.0

472.5a

165.5

165.0

Vulnerable Children

30.0

31.5

30.0

32.5

31.5

31.5

Family Planning/Reproductive Health

524.0

524.0

549.0

461.0

549.0

524.0

Other Public Health Threatsb

122.5

130.5

142.5

114.5

144.5

130.5

Global Health Security-USAID

900.0

700.0

650.0

50.0

480.0

700.0

Total, GHP-USAID

4,166.0

3,985.5

3,991.0

3,623.7c

3,830.0

3,985.5

Rescission

-500.0

Total, GHP

10,561.0

10,030.5

9,827.6

9,268.7

9,675.0

9,530.5

Sources: P.L. 117-328; P.L. 118-47; FY2025 Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs Congressional Budget Justification; H.R. 8771 (118th Congress); S. 4797 (118th Congress); P.L. 119-4, P.L. 119-28.

a. Includes $300 million designated to "be made available for American-made Ready-to-Use Therapeutic Foods (RUTF)."

b. Includes funding for Neglected Tropical Diseases (NTDs).

c. There is approximately $53.7 million in GHP made available to USAID but not designated for a specific subaccount. This total therefore includes the $3,580.0 million as specified above, as well as the $53.7 million unspecified.

House Legislation. The House-passed legislation, H.R. 8771 (118th Congress), would have provided a total of $9.27 billion for GHP, representing a 7.6% reduction from FY2024-enacted levels. The proposed level was also 5.7% less than the Administration's proposal for FY2025. The largest reductions compared with FY2024-enacted levels included those to global health security (-92.9%) and the U.S. contribution to the Global Fund (-24.2%). With respect to global health security, the report accompanying the legislation directed USAID "to leverage the capabilities and capacities generated by previous investments in global health and ensure deconfliction between global health security programs with other ongoing global health activities."⁵⁷

Senate Legislation. S. 4797 (118th Congress) would have provided a total of $9.67 billion for GHP, which would have been a 3.5% reduction from FY2024-enacted levels and was 1.5% lower than the Administration's request for FY2025. At the subaccount level, the largest reduction would have been to the U.S. contribution to the Global Fund (-27.4%). The measure would have included global health security funds both at USAID and State, including a $250.0 million contribution to the Pandemic Fund.⁵⁸

Continuing Resolution. P.L. 119-4 does not contain anomalies related to GHP and its subaccounts. Total funding for FY2025 for GHP is $10.03 billion; this amount is the same as FY2024 base funding and 2.1% more than what the Biden Administration proposed.

Rescissions. P.L. 119-28 includes $500.0 million in rescissions of FY2025 GHP funding. While the law does not designate from which subaccounts the funds will be rescinded, it states that none of the rescinded amounts should be from unobligated balances from "HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis, Malaria, Nutrition, or Maternal and Child Health" programs. Including the rescission, total funding for FY2025 for GHP is $9.53 billion, a 5.0% reduction from FY2024 base funding and 3.0% reduction from the Biden Administration's proposal.

Humanitarian Assistance Accounts

Title III includes three global humanitarian assistance accounts: International Disaster Assistance (IDA), Migration and Refugee Assistance (MRA), and Emergency Refugee and Migration Assistance (ERMA).⁵⁹ For FY2025, the Biden Administration requested a total of $8.47 billion for these three accounts, of which $2.47 billion would have been designated as emergency funding (Figure 6). The base level would have represented a 16.7% decrease from the base level provided for such accounts for FY2024 (not including emergency funds). When including emergency funding, the total requested for FY2025 would have represented a 54.9% decrease from total enacted levels for FY2024. According to the Administration, among other goals, the proposal would have sought to "maintain U.S. leadership in humanitarian response worldwide."⁶⁰

Figure 6. Humanitarian Assistance Accounts: FY2023-FY2025

Sources: P.L. 117-328; P.L. 118-47; P.L. 118-50; FY2025 Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs Congressional Budget Justification; H.R. 8771 (118th Congress); S. 4797 (118th Congress); P.L. 119-4; P.L. 119-28.

Notes: IDA = International Disaster Assistance; MRA = Migration and Refugee Assistance; ERMA = Emergency Refugee and Migration Assistance.

House Legislation. H.R. 8771 (118th Congress) would have provided a total of $5.41 billion for IDA and MRA; the measure did not include funding for ERMA. The total would have represented a 25.0% reduction compared with FY2024-enacted base levels. It met the Administration's base requests for IDA and MRA but was 10.0% lower than the Administration's total base request, which included $100 million in proposed funding for ERMA.

Senate Legislation. S. 4797 (118th Congress) would have provided a total of $8.86 billion for the three humanitarian accounts, of which $2.50 billion would have been designated as emergency. When compared with FY2024, the FY2025 base amount provided would have been an 11.8% reduction from the base enacted level and the FY2025 total amount would have been a 52.8% reduction from total enacted levels. Compared with the Administration's request for FY2025, the base amount provided was 24.9% less than the base request and the total was 36.9% less than the total request, largely due to the proposed ERMA appropriation ($100,000 proposed compared with the $100.0 million Administration request).

Continuing Resolution. P.L. 119-4 does not contain anomalies related to the three global humanitarian accounts. Total funding for FY2025 for the humanitarian accounts is $8.71 billion, the same as what Congress enacted in P.L. 118-47 for FY2024 and 2.8% more than what the Biden Administration proposed.

Rescissions. P.L. 119-28 includes a $496.0 million rescission of FY2025 IDA funding and a $800.0 million rescission of FY2025 MRA funding, bringing total FY2025 funding for the global humanitarian assistance accounts to $7.41 billion. This level is 14.9% less than what Congress enacted in P.L. 118-47 for FY2024 and 12.5% less than what the Biden Administration proposed. When including FY2024 emergency supplemental funding appropriated in P.L. 118-50, total funding for IDA and MRA for FY2025 is 58.5% less than the total FY2024 appropriated amount. With respect to the IDA rescission, the law notes that "none of the funds rescinded shall affect the administration of United States commodity-based food aid, including the Food for Peace program and the McGovern-Dole International Food for Education and Child Nutrition Program."

Non-Health Development & Transition Assistance

Title III funds six non-health development and transition assistance accounts: Development Assistance (DA), Transition Initiatives (TI), Complex Crisis Fund (CCF), Democracy Fund (DF), Economic Support Fund (ESF), and Assistance for Europe, Eurasia, and Central Asia. Collectively, these accounts provide funding for programs across a range of sectors, including democracy and governance, agriculture and food security, basic and higher education, and energy and the environment, among others. For FY2025, the Administration requested a total of $9.94 billion for the six accounts, of which $350.0 million would have been considered emergency (Figure 7). The base level would have represented a 13.4% increase from the base level provided for such accounts for FY2024 (not including emergency funds). When including emergency funding, the total requested for FY2025 would have represented a 46.5% decrease from total enacted levels for FY2024. Compared with base funding for FY2024, the Democracy Fund account is the only account that would have been decreased under the Administration's request (-15.8%).

Figure 7. Non-Health Development and Transition Assistance Accounts:
FY2023-FY2025

Source: P.L. 117-180; P.L. 117-328; P.L. 118-47; P.L. 118-50; FY2025 Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs Congressional Budget Justification; H.R. 8771 (118th Congress); S. 4797 (118th Congress); P.L. 119-4; P.L. 119-28.

Notes: DA = Development Assistance; TI = Transition Initiatives; CCF = Complex Crises Fund; ESF = Economic Support Fund; DF = Democracy Fund; AEECA = Assistance for Europe, Eurasia, and Central Asia.

House Legislation. H.R. 8771 (118th Congress) would have provided a total of $7.67 billion for the six accounts, representing a 9.3% reduction from FY2024-enacted base levels. The proposed level was also 20.0% less than the Administration's base proposal for FY2025. Three accounts would have seen increases over FY2024-enacted base levels—AEECA (+67.3%), TI (+6.7%), and DF (+3.0%)—while the remaining three would have seen reductions—CCF (-45.5%), DA (-23.7%), and ESF (-4.4%).

Senate Legislation. S. 4797 (118th Congress) would have provided a total of $9.63 billion for the six accounts, of which $1.22 billion would have been designated as emergency funding. The proposed base level would have represented a 0.5% reduction from FY2024-enacted base levels and was 12.3% lower than the Administration's base request. Comparing totals, the proposed FY2025 level would have represented a 48.1% reduction from FY2024 total enacted levels and was 3.1% lower than the Administration's total request.

Continuing Resolution. P.L. 119-4 does not contain anomalies related to budget authority provided for the six non-health development and transition assistance accounts. Total funding for FY2025 for these accounts is $9.07 billion, the same as what Congress enacted in P.L. 118-47 for FY2024 and 8.8% less than what the Biden Administration proposed.

Rescissions. P.L. 119-28 includes rescissions of FY2025 funding for all six non-health development and transition assistance accounts:

$2.50 billion from Development Assistance, noting that no rescissions shall affect Feed the Future Innovations Labs or the Countering PRC Influence Fund, or the administration of the Food for Peace or McGovern-Dole International Food for Education and Child Nutrition programs;

$57.0 million from Transition Initiatives;

$43.0 million from Complex Crisis Fund;

$1.65 billion from Economic Support Fund, noting that no rescissions shall affect assistance to Jordan, Egypt, or the Countering PRC Influence Fund;

$83.0 million from Democracy Fund; and

$460.0 million from Assistance for Europe, Eurasia, and Central Asia.

These rescissions bring the total FY2025 funding for non-health development and transition assistance accounts to $4.37 billion, about a 51.8% decrease from what Congress enacted in P.L. 118-47 for FY2024 and a 57.0% decrease from the Biden Administration's proposal. When taking into account emergency supplemental funding for these accounts for FY2024, total funding for FY2025 represents a 77.0% decrease from total FY2024-enacted funding.

Independent Agencies and Treasury Programs

The Biden Administration proposed $1.51 billion for independent agencies for FY2025, a 4.2% increase from FY2024-enacted levels. All agencies would have seen level or increased funding under the proposal, with the Peace Corps receiving the largest increase (+11.3%), followed by the Inter-American Foundation (IAF, +10.6%) and the Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC, +0.8%).⁶¹ Funding for the U.S. African Development Foundation (USADF) would have equaled FY2024-enacted levels.

For FY2025 Treasury Programs, the Administration proposed $40.0 million for International Affairs Technical Assistance and a net proposal of -$101.0 million ($10.0 million request for budget authority and $111.0 million rescission) for Debt Restructuring.⁶² The Administration did not propose funding for the Tropical Forest and Coral Reef Conservation account, which received funds in FY2024. In sum, Treasury programs would have been reduced by 177.2% from FY2024-enacted levels under the Administration's FY2025 request.

House Legislation. H.R. 8771 (118th Congress) would have provided $1.42 billion for independent agencies, which would have represented a 2.2% reduction from FY2024-enacted levels and was 6.1% lower than the President's request. Compared with FY2024-enacted levels, the largest cuts would have been to the IAF (-52.1%) and USADF (-33.3%). For Treasury International Programs, the House bill would have provided $30.0 million for International Affairs Technical Assistance and $10.0 million for Debt Restructuring. The bill would have also implemented the Administration's $111.0 million rescission.⁶³

Senate Legislation. The Senate Appropriations Committee measure would have provided a total of $1.51 billion for the independent agencies, which would have represented a 4.2% increase from the FY2024-enacted level and was equal to the Administration's request. The committee also met the President's request for Treasury International Programs but added $5.0 million for the Tropical Forest and Coral Reef Conservation Account. In total, the $55.0 million in budget authority proposed for Treasury International Programs for FY2025 would have represented a 30.4% reduction from the FY2024-enacted level.

Continuing Resolution. P.L. 119-4 does not contain anomalies related to budget authority provided for independent agencies. Total funding for the independent agencies is $1.45 billion, equal to what Congress enacted for FY2024 and 4.0% less than what the Administration requested.

The CR includes one anomaly related to budget authority provided for Treasury International Programs: a reduction of $16.0 million for the Department of the Treasury Debt Restructuring account. The law also includes an anomaly adding the $111.0 million proposed rescission from the Department of the Treasury Debt Restructuring account. Total funding for FY2025 for SFOPS Treasury Programs includes $38 million for the International Affairs Technical Assistance account and $15 million for the Tropical Forest and Coral Reef Conservation account, both equal to FY2024 funding, and a net of -$101.0 million for Debt Restructuring. In sum, the FY2025 net amount is 160.8% less than was provided in FY2024 and 21.3% less than the President's request.

Rescissions. P.L. 119-28 includes two rescissions affecting FY2025 funding for Independent Agencies: $27.0 million from the Inter-American Foundation and $22.0 million from the U.S. Africa Development Foundation. Including these, total funding for the independent agencies for FY2025 is $1.40 billion, 3.4% less than FY2024-enacted funding and 7.2% less than the Biden Administration's proposal.

Title IV: International Security Assistance

Title IV provides funding for five security assistance accounts: International Narcotics Control and Law Enforcement (INCLE); Nonproliferation, Anti-terrorism, Demining and Related Programs (NADR); Peacekeeping Operations (PKO); International Military Education and Training (IMET); and Foreign Military Financing (FMF). For FY2025, the Biden Administration requested a total of $9.11 billion for the title, which would have represented a 6.6% increase over FY2024-enacted base funding (Figure 8). Of the five accounts, INCLE would have seen the largest increase over FY2024-enacted base funding (+21.9%).

Figure 8. Security Assistance Accounts: FY2023-FY2025

Sources: P.L. 117-328; P.L. 118-47; P.L. 118-50; FY2025 Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs Congressional Budget Justification; H.R. 8771 (118th Congress); S. 4797 (118th Congress); P.L. 119-4.

Notes: NADR = Nonproliferation, Anti-terrorism, Demining, and Related Programs; PKO = Peacekeeping Operations; IMET = International Military Education and Training; FMF = Foreign Military Financing; INCLE = International Narcotics Control and Law Enforcement.

House Legislation. H.R. 8771 (118th Congress) would have provided a total of $10.36 billion for Title IV. This level would have represented a 21.3% increase over FY2024-enacted base levels and was 13.8% higher than the Administration's request. Consistent with the Administration's prioritization of INCLE, the House measure provided the greatest increase in funding to INCLE compared with the other four Title IV accounts (+60.8% over FY2024-enacted base and +31.9% higher than the request for FY2025). Both the request and House-passed measure cited combating fentanyl trafficking as of particular importance, with the House report stating that "the Committee notes the proliferation of fentanyl into America's neighborhoods as one of the greatest challenges facing the United States. Within that context, the Committee urges the Secretary of State to maximize focus and resources within this account to counter fentanyl trafficking."⁶⁴

Senate Legislation. S. 4797 (118th Congress) would have provided a total of $8.98 billion for Title IV, of which $2.19 billion would have been designated as emergency funding. The proposed base level would have represented a 20.4% reduction from FY2024-enacted base levels and was 25.4% lower than the Administration's base request. Comparing totals, the Senate-proposed FY2025 level would have represented a 45.6% reduction from FY2024 total enacted levels and was 1.4% lower than the Administration's total request. At the base level, compared with FY2024, the greatest reduction would have been to INCLE (-30.0%); unlike the Administration's request and House-passed legislation, combating fentanyl trafficking was not highlighted as a particular priority for INCLE funding.⁶⁵

Continuing Resolution. P.L. 119-4 does not contain anomalies related to budget authority provided for the five security assistance accounts. Total funding for FY2025 for these accounts is $8.93 billion, the same as what Congress enacted for the accounts in P.L. 118-47 for FY2024 and 1.9% less than what the Biden Administration proposed. When including emergency supplemental funding enacted for FY2024 in P.L. 118-50, total funding for FY2025 represents a 45.9% decrease from the total FY2024-enacted level.

Title V: Multilateral Assistance

For Title V, which provides funds for voluntary U.S. multilateral engagement, the Biden Administration proposed $4.00 billion, a 46.0% increase compared with the FY2024-enacted level. The increase was largely a result of requested funds for U.S. contributions to entities that were not included in the FY2024 appropriation. These included the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (IBRD) Portfolio Guarantee, the Asian Development Bank, the Inter-American Development Bank, the Global Infrastructure Facility (listed under Quality Infrastructure in budget documents), and the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development. Other entities in the request would have received no funding or seen large decreases in FY2025 funding compared with FY2024, including the Global Agriculture and Food Security Program (GAFSP, -100%), Treasury International Assistance Programs (-70.0%), and the Asian Development Fund (-50.0%).

House Legislation. The House-passed bill, H.R. 8771 (118th Congress), would have provided a total of $1.72 billion for Title V, which would have been a 37.2% reduction compared with FY2024-enacted levels and was 57.0% lower than the FY2025 request. Compared with FY2024, the measure would have zeroed out the International Organizations and Programs and Treasury International Assistance Programs accounts and not provided contributions to the Clean Technology Fund or GAFSP. Funding provided for all other accounts and contributions in the title would have been at equal or reduced amounts compared with those in FY2024-enacted appropriations.

Senate Legislation. The Senate Appropriations Committee bill, S. 4797 (118th Congress), included $3.15 billion for Title V, representing a 14.8% increase from FY2024-enacted base appropriations. The proposed level was 21.4% less than the Administration's request. Compared with FY2024-enacted base levels, the largest increases under the measure would have been to Treasury International Assistance Programs (+300.0%), the International Fund for Agricultural Development (+25.6%), and the Clean Technology Fund (+20.0%); the only reduction would have been to the Asian Development Fund (-50.0%).

Continuing Resolution. P.L. 119-4 includes one anomaly for Title V: a reduction in funding for the Asian Development Fund from $87.2 million to $43.6 million. Total funding for Title V accounts for FY2025 is $2.70 billion, a reduction of 1.6% from FY2024 levels and 32.6% less than what the Biden Administration proposed.

Rescissions. P.L. 119-28 includes a total of $561.9 million in rescissions of FY2025 Title V funding: a zeroing out of the International Organizations and Programs (-$436.9 million) and the Contribution to the Clean Technology Fund (-$125.0 million) accounts. Including these rescissions, total Title V funding for FY2025 is $2.14 billion, a 22.1% reduction from FY2024-enacted funding and 46.6% lower than the Biden Administration's Title V request.

Title VI: Export and Investment Assistance

Title VI provides funding for three agencies: the Export-Import Bank (Ex-Im Bank), the U.S. International Development Finance Corporation (DFC), and the U.S. Trade and Development Agency (USTDA).⁶⁶ For Ex-Im and DFC, offsetting collections are meant to reduce each agency's budgetary impact. For FY2025, the Biden Administration requested $532.3 million for Title VI, inclusive of projected offsetting collections. This level would have represented a 29.7% decrease from FY2024-enacted levels.

House Legislation. The House-passed measure, H.R. 8771 (118th Congress), would have provided $520.6 million for Title VI, which would have represented a 31.3% decrease from FY2024-enacted levels and was 2.2% lower than the Administration's request for FY2025.

Senate Legislation. S. 4797 (118th Congress) would have provided a total of $778.1 million, inclusive of projected offsetting collections, for Tile VI for FY2025. This level would have represented an increase of 2.7% over FY2024-enacted levels and was 46.2% higher than the Administration's request.

Continuing Resolution. P.L. 119-4 does not contain anomalies related to budget authority provided for the Title VI agencies. If assuming equal offsetting collections to those projected for FY2024 in P.L. 118-47, FY2025 funding for Title VI is equal to that for FY2024 and 42.3% higher than what the Administration proposed.

Outlook

While Congress enacted P.L. 119-4, providing funding for FY2025 largely at FY2024 levels, some Members have and may continue to engage with issues related to such funding, including the following:

Allocations of Appropriations. P.L. 119-4 was not accompanied by explanatory text; as such, House and Senate Appropriations Committee reports accompanying their respective FY2025 SFOPS bills do not apply unless specifically indicated.⁶⁷ While total funding for FY2025 may be level with that of FY2024 for some appropriations accounts, with fewer directives on appropriated funds, the Administration may have more discretion in allocations, potentially yielding significant program changes.

Rescissions. On May 28, 2025, the Trump Administration transmitted to Congress a request for $8.07 billion in rescissions of FY2025 SFOPS funding (see Table 5; an additional $236.3 million in rescissions of FY2024 SFOPS funding were also requested).⁶⁸ On July 17, Congress enacted legislation including $7.67 billion in rescissions of FY2025 SFOPS funding; the President signed the act into law on July 24, 2025, as P.L. 119-28. The legislation includes directives related to certain types of programs (e.g., not allowing for rescinded funds to be drawn from FY2025 funds made available for the Countering PRC Influence Fund). Congress may track from what programs the Administration rescinds funds, in part to determine the Administration's adherence to such directives. Congress may also consider additional rescissions of enacted FY2025 funds.

Supplementals. FY2025 SFOPS funding may also increase, should Congress enact supplemental appropriations in response to an emergency need in the current fiscal year.

Foreign Affairs Agency Restructuring. The Trump Administration has taken steps to eliminate or downsize, consolidate, and/or restructure a number of the U.S. foreign affairs agencies. Certain SFOPS appropriations accounts have traditionally been directed to be managed by specific entities within such agencies (e.g., for FY2025, a portion of the Democracy Fund is allocated to the State Department's Bureau for Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor and the remaining amount is allocated to USAID's Bureau for Democracy, Human Rights, and Governance). Members may seek more clarity on how appropriated funds are to be managed in light of the Administration's actions related to the structure of foreign affairs agencies.

Table 5. Trump Administration Rescission Proposal and P.L. 119-28

(In millions of current U.S. dollars)

Appropriations Account

Amounts Requested to be Rescinded

Enacted Rescissions

Contributions to International Organizations

168.84

168.84

Contributions for International Peacekeeping Activities

157.91

157.91

Global Health Programs - USAID

500.00

500.00

Global Health Programs - State

400.00

—

Migration and Refugee Assistance

800.00

800.00

Complex Crises Fund

43.00

43.00

Democracy Fund

83.00

83.00

Economic Support Fund

1,650.00

1,650.00

Clean Technology Fund

125.00

125.00

International Organizations and Programs

436.92

436.92

Development Assistance

2,500.00

2,500.00

Assistance for Europe, Eurasia, and Central Asia

460.00

460.00

International Disaster Assistance

496.00

496.00

USAID Operating Expenses

125.00

125.00

Transition Initiatives

57.00

57.00

Inter-American Foundation

27.00

27.00

U.S. African Development Foundation

22.00

22.00

U.S. Institute of Peace

15.00

15.00

TOTAL

8,066.66

7,666.66

Source: Letter from Russell Vought, Director of the Office of Management and Budget, to President Trump, May 28, 2025, P.L. 119-28.

Notes: The request also includes rescission request for $236.3 million in FY2024 funds: $33.0 million from the Contributions to International Organizations account and $203.3 million from the Contributions for International Peacekeeping Activities account.

Appendix. Supplementary Tables and Figures

The following tables and figure provide additional detail on and comparisons of the FY2024-enacted levels, FY2025 request, the House- and Senate-proposed FY2025 measures, and FY2025-enacted levels. Table A-1 provides an account-by-account comparison of the two years; Table A-2 offers a similar comparison focused specifically on the International Affairs budget (Function 150). Figure A-1 depicts the International Affairs budget account structure.

Table A-1. Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs Appropriations: FY2024-FY2025

(In millions of current U.S. dollars; numbers in parentheses are the portion of the account totals designated as emergency funds)

FY2024 Enacteda

FY2025 Requestb

FY2025 House

FY2025 Senate

FY2025 Enactedc

% Change FY2025 Request to Enacted

% Change FY2024 Total Enacted to FY2025 Total Enacted

Title I. Department of State and Related Agencies

17,710.22
(272.00)

18,784.40
(310.00)

15,135.87

17,604.59

17,133.16
(250.00)

-8.8%

-3.3%

Administration of Foreign Affairs, Subtotal

13,199.20
(272.00)

13,981.43

12,231.41

13,077.37

12,927.20

-7.5%

-2.1%

Diplomatic Programs

9,623.11
(210.00)

10,121.43

8,381.89

9,731.61

9,413.11

-7.0%

-2.2%

of which Worldwide Security Protection

3,913.71
(100.00)

3,928.71

3,928.71

3,890.71

3,813.71

-2.9%

-2.6%

Consular and Border Security Programs

50.00

491.00

496.00

0.00

50.00

-89.8%

0.0%

Capital Investment Fund

389.00

401.85

389.00

401.85

389.00

-3.2%

0.0%

Office of Inspector General

143.67
(12.00)

134.64

137.80

127.84

131.67

-2.2%

-8.4%

Educational & Cultural Exchange Programs

741.00

777.50

720.95

761.05

741.00

-4.7%

0.0%

Representation Expenses

7.42

7.42

7.42

7.42

7.42

0.0%

0.0%

Protection of Foreign Missions & Officials

30.89

30.89

30.89

30.89

30.89

0.0%

0.0%

Embassy Security, Construction, & Maintenance

1,957.82

1,907.07

1,957.82

1,907.07

1,957.82

+2.7%

0.0%

of which Worldwide Security Upgrades

1,055.21

961.86

1,012.61

961.86

1,055.21

+9.7%

0.0%

Emergencies in the Diplomatic & Consular Service

58.89
(50.00)

8.89

8.89

8.89

8.89

0.0%

-84.9%

Repatriation Loans

1.80

1.80

1.80

1.80

1.80

0.0%

0.0%

Payment to American Institute in Taiwan

35.96

38.22

38.22

38.22

35.96

-5.9%

0.0%

International Chancery Center

0.74

0.75

0.75

0.75

0.74

-0.1%

0.0%

Foreign Service Retirement (mandatory)

158.90

60.00

60.00

60.00

158.90

+164.8%

0.0%

International Organizations

2,910.86

2,910.83

1,338.51

2,910.83

2,450.85

-15.8%

-15.8%

Contributions to International Organizations

1,543.45

1,676.69

269.61

1,676.69

1,374.61

-18.0%

-10.9%

Contributions to International Peacekeeping Activities

1,367.41

1,234.14

1,068.90

1,234.14

1,076.24

-12.8%

-21.3%

International Commissions (FUNCTION 300)

302.77

526.90
(310.00)

333.37

313.59

474.72
(250.00)

-9.9%

+56.8%

Int'l Boundary and Water Commission

220.85

457.30
(310.00)

250.35

228.85

392.80
(250.00)d

-14.1%

+77.9%

American Sections - International Commissions

16.20

14.33

17.30

16.20

16.20

+13.1%

0.0%

International Fisheries Commissions

65.72

55.27

65.72

68.53

65.72

+18.9%

0.0%

Agency for Global Media

866.91

950.00

807.90

871.42

866.91

-8.7%

0.0%

International Broadcasting Operations

857.21

940.30

798.20

861.72

857.21

-8.8%

0.0%

Broadcasting Capital Improvements

9.70

9.70

9.70

9.70

9.70

0.0%

0.0%

Related Programs, Subtotal

414.50

400.25

409.70

417.25

399.50

+3.6%

-3.6%

Asia Foundation

22.00

22.00

19.58

23.00

22.00

0.0%

0.0%

United States Institute of Peace

55.00

55.46

55.00

55.46

40.0

-27.9%

-27.3%

Center for Middle Eastern-Western Dialogue Trust Fund

0.20

0.20

0.20

0.20

0.20

+4.1%

0.0%

Eisenhower Exchange Fellowship Program

0.18

0.19

0.19

0.19

0.18

-2.7%

0.0%

Israeli-Arab Scholarship Program

0.12

0.16

0.16

0.16

0.12

-26.9%

0.0%

East-West Center

22.00

22.26

19.58

23.26

22.00

-1.1%

0.0%

National Endowment for Democracy

315.00

300.00

315.00

315.00

315.00

+5.0%

0.0%

Other Commissions, Subtotal

15.98

14.98

14.98

14.13

13.98

-6.7%

-12.5%

Commission for the Preservation of America's Heritage Abroad

0.77

0.77

0.77

0.77

0.77

0.0%

0.0%

United States Commission on International Religious Freedom

4.00

4.85

4.85

4.00

4.00

-17.5%

0.0%

Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe

2.91

3.06

3.06

3.06

2.91

-5.0%

0.0%

Congressional-Executive Commission on the People's Republic of China

2.30

2.30

2.30

2.30

2.30

0.0%

0.0%

United States-China Economic and Security Review Commission

4.00

4.00

4.00

4.00

4.00

0.0%

0.0%

Commission on Reform & Modernization of Dept. of State

2.00

—

—

—

—

n.a.

-100.0%

Foreign Operations, Total

70,342.55
(29,036.00)

45,555.69
(2,815.00)

37,967.30

44,745.41
(5,900.00)

36,311.12
(2,500.00)

-20.3%

-48.4%

Title II. Administration of Foreign Assistance

2,091.60
(52.00)

2,224.75

1,563.91

2,109.09

1,914.60

-13.9%

-8.5%

USAID Operating Expenses

1,734.00
(39.00)

1,863.06

1,214.81

1,747.40

1,570.00

-15.7%

-9.5%

Capital Investment Fund

259.10

272.89

259.10

272.89

259.10

-5.1%

0.0%

Inspector General

98.50
(13.00)

88.80

90.00

88.80

85.50

-3.7%

-13.2%

Title III. Bilateral Economic Assistance

47,984.98
(20,759.00)

29,688.72
(2,815.00)

23,801.23

29,730.37
(3,715.00)

22,570.98
(2,110.00)

-24.0%

-53.0%

Global Health Programs, Total

10,030.45

9,827.16

9,268.71

9,674.95

9,530.45

-3.0%

-5.0%

of which, USAID

3,985.45

3,991.00

3,623.71

3,829.95

3,485.45

-12.7%

-12.5%

of which, State

6,045.00

5,836.60

5,645.00

5,845.00

6,045.00

3.6%

0.0%

Development Assistance

3,931.00

4,534.70

3,000.00

4,153.15

1,431.00

-68.4%

-63.6%

International Disaster Assistance

10,434.00
(6,405.00)

4,543.36
(1,091.00)

3,452.36

4,829.00
(1,400.00)

4,283.00
(750.00)

-5.7%

-59.0%

Transition Initiatives

100.00
(25.00)

90.00

80.00

85.00

18.00

-80.0%

-82.0%

Complex Crisis Fund

55.00

60.00

30.00

60.00

12.00

-80.0%

-78.2%

Economic Support Fund

11,789.40
(8,199.00)

4,113.23

3,430.89

4,083.32
(815.00)

2,240.40
(300.00)

-45.5%

-81.0%

Democracy Fund

345.20

290.70

355.70

345.20

262.20

-9.8%

-24.0%

Assistance for Europe, Eurasia & Central Asia

2,345.33
(1,885.00)

850.33
(350.00)

770.33

902.79
(400.00)

310.33
(310.00)

-63.5%

-86.8%

Migration & Refugee Assistance

7,423.00
(4,245.00)

3,827.24
(1,374.00)

1,953.24

4,028.85
(1,100.00)

3,128.00
(750.00)

-18.3%

-57.9%

Emergency Refugee & Migration Assistance

0.10

100.00

—

0.10

0.10

-99.9%

0.0%

Independent Agencies, Subtotal

1,452.50

1,513.00

1,420.00

1,513.00

1,403.50

-7.2%

-3.4%

Peace Corps

430.50

479.00

430.50

479.00

430.50

-10.1%

0.0%

Millennium Challenge Corporation

930.00

937.00

937.00

937.00

930.00

-0.7%

0.0%

Inter-American Foundation

47.00

52.00

22.50

52.00

20.00

-61.5%

-57.4%

U.S. Africa Development Foundation

45.00

45.00

30.00

45.00

23.00

-48.9%

-48.9%

Department of the Treasury, Subtotal

79.00

-61.00

40.00

55.00

-48.00

-21.3%

-160.8%

International Affairs Technical Assistance

38.00

40.00

30.00

40.00

38.00

-5.0%

0.0%

Treasury Debt Restructuring

26.00

-101.00

10.00

10.00

-101.00

0.0%

-488.5%

Tropical Forest and Coral Reef Conservation

15.00

—

—

5.00

15.00

n.a.

0.0%

Title IV. International Security Assistance

16,518.01
(7,975.00)

9,107.71

10,361.12

8,982.10
(2,185.00)

8,933.01
(390.00)

-1.9%

-45.9%

International Narcotics Control & Law Enforcement

1,775.00
(490.00)

1,566.18

2,066.18

1,400.00
(500.00)

1,400.00
(115.00)

-10.6%

-21.1%

Nonproliferation, Anti-terrorism, Demining & Related Programs

970.00
(100.00)

921.00

921.00

884.20

870.00

-5.5%

-10.3%

Peacekeeping Operations

420.46
(10.00)

411.05

420.46

411.05

410.46

-0.1%

-2.4%

International Military Education & Training

119.15

125.43

125.43

125.43

119.15

-5.0%

0.0%

Foreign Military Financing

13,233.40
(7,375.00)

6,084.05

6,828.05

6,161.43
(1,685.00)

6,133.40
(275.00)

+0.8%

-53.7%

Title V. Multilateral Assistance

2,990.75
(250.00)

4,002.22

1,720.41

3,145.75

2,135.22

-46.6%

-28.6%

International Organizations & Programs

436.92

459.80

—

474.54

—

-100.0%

-100.0%

Int'l Bank for Reconstruction & Development

206.50

233.32

206.50

206.50

206.50

-11.5%

0.0%

IBRD Portfolio Guarantee

—

1,000.00

—

—

—

-100.0%

n.a.

Global Environment Facility

150.20

150.20

139.58

150.20

150.20

0.0%

0.0%

International Development Association

1,630.26
(250.00)

1,430.26

1,097.01

1,480.26

1,380.26

-3.5%

-15.3%

Asian Development Bank

—

84.38

—

—

—

-100.0%

n.a.

Asian Development Fund

87.22

43.61

43.61

43.61

43.61

0.0%

-50.0%

African Development Bank

54.65

54.65

32.42

54.65

54.65

0.0%

0.0%

African Development Fund

197.00

197.00

171.30

197.00

197.00

0.0%

0.0%

Inter-American Development Bank

—

75.00

—

—

—

-100.0%

n.a.

MDB Climate Trust Funds and Facilities

—

5.00

—

—

—

-100.0%

n.a.

Quality Infrastructure

50.00

15.00

—

—

50.00

+233.3%

0.0%

Treasury International Assistance Programs

125.00

150.00

—

200.00

—

-100.0%

-100.0%

Clean Technology Fund

—

—

—

150.00

—

n.a.

n.a.

International Fund for Agricultural Development

43.00

54.00

30.00

54.00

43.00

-20.4%

0.0%

Global Agriculture and Food Security Program

10.00

—

—

10.00

10.00

n.a.

0.0%

European Bank for Reconstruction and Development

—

50.00

—

50.00

—

-100.0%

n.a.

Title VI. Export and Investment Assistance

757.31

532.30

520.63

778.10

757.31

+42.3%

0.0%

Export-Import Bank

98.86

-119.10

79.60

84.70

98.86

-183.0%

0.0%

International Development Finance Corporation

571.45

551.40

354.03

593.40

571.45

+3.6%

0.0%

Trade and Development Agency

87.00

100.00

87.00

100.00

87.00

-13.0%

0.0%

TOTAL, before rescissions

88,052.77
(29,308.00)

64,340.09
(3,125.00)

53,103.16

62,350.00
(5,900.00)

53,444.28
(2,750.00)

-16.9%

-39.3%

Title VII. General Provisions + all rescissions

-2,277.97

-986.10

-816.16

-171.00

-1,052.83

-17.2%

-64.2%

TOTAL, Net of Rescissions

85,774.80
(29,308.00)

63,353.99
(3,125.00)

52,287.00

62,179.00
(5,900.00)

52,391.45
(2,750.00)

-17.3%

-38.9%

Sources: P.L. 117-180; P.L. 117-328; P.L. 118-47; P.L. 118-50; FY2025 Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs Congressional Budget Justification; Letter from President Joseph R. Biden to Speaker of the House Mike Johnson; H.R. 8771 (118th Congress); S. 4797 (118th Congress); P.L. 118-158; P.L. 119-4; P.L. 119-28.

a. Totals include base and designated emergency funds from the Further Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2024 (P.L. 118-47, Division F), and emergency supplemental funding from Divisions A, B, and C of P.L. 118-50, "Making emergency supplemental appropriations for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2024, and for other purposes."

b. FY2025 Request total includes $2.815 billion of discretionary funding designated as emergency (AEECA $350 million, IDA $1.091 billion, MRA $1.374 billion).

c. In P.L. 119-4, Congress enacted levels that were the same as what Congress enacted for FY2024 in P.L. 118-47. The exceptions include zeroed out funding for the Commission on Reform and Modernization of the Department of State, which received $2 million for FY2024; reduced funding for Contributions for International Peacekeeping Activities from $1.37 billion to $1.23 billion; reduced funding for Department of the Treasury Debt Restructuring from $26.0 million to $10.0 million (-$101.0 million when including a $111.0 million rescission); and reduced funding for a Contribution to the Asian Development Fund from $87.2 million to $43.6 million. P.L. 119-4 also made changes to rescission levels for a total of $816.5 million (not including the Treasury Debt Restructuring rescission), compared with $2.28 billion rescinded in the FY2024-enacted measure. In P.L. 119-28, Congress enacted $7.67 billion in rescissions from the previously enacted FY2025 SFOPS appropriations across a range of accounts. This column reflects the enacted rescissions.

d. P.L. 118-158, a measure that included a Continuing Resolution providing funding for government agencies through March 14, 2025, and the Disaster Relief Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2025, among other provisions, included $250 million in emergency funding for the International Boundary and Water Commission.

The International Affairs budget, or Function 150, includes funding that is not in the Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs (SFOPS) appropriations legislation; in particular, international food assistance programs (Food for Peace Act, Title II (FFP) and McGovern-Dole International Food for Education and Child Nutrition programs) are in the Agriculture appropriations legislation, and the Foreign Claim Settlement Commission and the International Trade Commission are in the Commerce, Justice, Science appropriations legislation. In addition, the SFOPS appropriations measure includes funding for certain international commissions that are not part of the International Affairs Function 150 account. Table A-2 details recent and proposed funding under the Function 150 budget structure, which is depicted in Figure A-1.

Table A-2. International Affairs Budget: FY2024-FY2025

(In millions of current U.S. dollars; numbers in parentheses are the portion of the account totals designated as emergency funds)

FY2024 Enacteda

FY2025 Requestb

FY2025 House

FY2025 Senate

FY2025 Enacted

% Change FY2025 Request to Enacted

% Change FY2024 Total Enacted to FY2025 Total Enacted

SFOPS, excluding Commissions

85,472.03
(29,308.00)

62,827.09
(2,815.00)

51,953.63

61,865.41
(5,900.00)

52,153.06
(2,500.00)

-17.0%

-39.0%

Agriculture

1,927.58

2,043.33

1,240.00

1,970.61

1,927.58

-5.7%

0.0%

Food for Peace Act, Title II Grants

1,687.58

1,800.00

1,000.00

1,720.61

1,687.58

-6.2%

0.0%

McGovern-Dole

240.00

243.33

240.00

250.00

240.00

-1.4%

0.0%

Commerce-Science-Justice

124.50

129.76

117.50

128.60

124.50

-4.0%

0.0%

Foreign Claims Settlement Commission

2.50

2.66

2.50

2.50

2.50

-5.7%

0.0%

International Trade Commission

122.00

126.10

115.00

126.10

122.00

-3.3%

0.0%

Japan-U.S. Friendship Commission

1.00

—

—

—

-100.0%

n.a.

Total International Affairs (150)

87,524.11
(29,308.00)

65,000.18
(2,815.00)

53,311.14

63,964.62
(5,900.00)

54.205.15
(2,500.00)

-16.6%

-38.1%

Sources: P.L. 117-180; P.L. 117-328; P.L. 118-42; P.L. 118-47; P.L. 118-50; FY2025 Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs Congressional Budget Justification; H.R. 8771 (118th Congress); H.R. 9027 (118th Congress); H.R. 9026 (118th Congress); S. 4690 (118th Congress); S. 4797 (118th Congress); S. 4795 (118th Congress); P.L. 119-4; P.L. 119-28.

a. Totals include base and designated emergency funds from the Further Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2024 (P.L. 118-47, Division F), and emergency supplemental funding from Divisions A, B, and C of P.L. 118-50, "Making emergency supplemental appropriations for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2024, and for other purposes."

b. FY2025 Request total includes $2.815 billion of discretionary funding designated as emergency (AEECA $350 million, IDA $1.091 billion, MRA $1.374 billion).

Figure A-1. International Affairs Budget Components

Source: Created by CRS.

Footnotes

1.

The SFOPS appropriation aligns closely but not exactly with the International Affairs budget (Function 150). The primary differences are that international food aid programs are part of Function 150 but funded through the Agriculture appropriation, and that SFOPS includes funding for international commissions that are part of the Function 300 budget (Natural Resources and Environment).

2.

Rescissions of prior year funding do not affect new budget authority but are considered when calculating budget totals for purposes such as compliance with Appropriations Committees' 302(b) allocations or statutory spending caps.

3.

Letter from President Joseph R. Biden to Speaker of the House Mike Johnson, November 18, 2024, at https://bidenwhitehouse.archives.gov/wp-content/uploads/2024/11/Letter-regarding-critical-disaster-funding-needs.pdf.

4.

Letter from President Joseph R. Biden to Speaker of the House Mike Johnson, November 18, 2024, p. 5, at https://bidenwhitehouse.archives.gov/wp-content/uploads/2024/11/Letter-regarding-critical-disaster-funding-needs.pdf.

5.

For a brief explanation of discretionary and mandatory budget authority, see CRS In Focus IF12105, Introduction to Budget Authority, by James V. Saturno.

6.

The FY2025 request includes mention of a further $100 million for the CHIPS and Science Act but notes that the budget authority has already been provided.

7.

State Department, FY2025 Congressional Budget Justification, Foreign Operations, pp. 189-190.

8.

Ibid., p. 190.

9.

The FY2024 request included mandatory funding for the Compacts of Free Association (COFA; for more, see CRS In Focus IF12194, The Compacts of Free Association, by Thomas Lum). Under the request, such funds would have been administered by the Department of State instead of the Department of the Interior (DOI), through which COFA assistance had previously been funded and administered. Congress enacted the Compact of Free Association Amendments Act of 2024 (Division G of P.L. 118-42), which approved Compact economic packages but maintained the existing structure with DOI managing the funding and administration of assistance.

10.

For the report accompanying the measure, see H.Rept. 118-554.

11.

For the report accompanying the measure, see S.Rept. 118-200.

12.

For more on the act and its anomalies, see CRS Report R48517, Section-by-Section Summary of the Full-Year Continuing Appropriations Act, 2025 (Division A of P.L. 119-4), coordinated by Drew C. Aherne.

13.

Section 11203 of P.L. 119-4.

14.

Section 11204 of P.L. 119-4.

15.

Section 11207(2) of P.L. 119-4.

16.

Section 11202 of P.L. 119-4.

17.

State Department, FY2025 Congressional Budget Justification, Department of State Diplomatic Engagement, Appendix 1, p. 370.

18.

Ibid., p. 388.

19.

Ibid., pp. 373, 375.

20.

Ibid., p. 390.

21.

Ibid., p. 391.

22.

H.Rept. 118-554, p. 20.

23.

S.Rept. 118-200, p. 11.

24.

Ibid., pp. 20-21.

25.

Section 11205(1) of P.L. 119-4.

26.

State Department, FY2025 Congressional Budget Justification, Department of State Diplomatic Engagement, Appendix 1, p. 442.

27.

Ibid., p. 484.

28.

Ibid., p. 443.

29.

For more detail, see CRS In Focus IF10354, United Nations Issues: U.S. Funding to the U.N. System, by Luisa Blanchfield.

30.

State Department, FY2025 Congressional Budget Justification, Department of State Diplomatic Engagement, Appendix 1, p. 484.

31.

For more detail, see CRS In Focus IF10597, United Nations Issues: U.S. Funding of U.N. Peacekeeping, by Luisa Blanchfield.

32.

State Department, FY2025 Congressional Budget Justification, Department of State Diplomatic Engagement, Appendix 1, p. 484.

33.

CRS In Focus IF10597, United Nations Issues: U.S. Funding of U.N. Peacekeeping, by Luisa Blanchfield.

34.

CRS Report R47579, Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs: FY2024 Budget and Appropriations, by Emily M. McCabe and Cory R. Gill, pp. 15-18; and CRS Report R47070, Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs: FY2023 Budget and Appropriations, by Emily M. McCabe and Cory R. Gill, pp. 10-13. While the Administration says that its request does not include requisite funding for the State Department to pay U.S. peacekeeping assessments above the 25% statutory cap, it includes authority that would allow the State Department to do so. See the proviso of the proposed appropriations language at State Department, FY2025 Congressional Budget Justification, Department of State Diplomatic Engagement, Appendix 1, p. 483.

35.

For a list of such organizations, see H.Rept. 118-554, p. 23.

36.

Ibid.; see also Section 7048(d) and (k) of H.R. 8771.

37.

H.Rept. 118-554, p. 25.

38.

S.Rept. 118-200, p. 23. As with other full-year CRs enacted in recent decades, the full-year CR for FY2025 is not accompanied by any explanatory text, either in the form of a committee report, joint explanatory statement, or conference report. As a consequence, the House and Senate Appropriations Committee reports accompanying each chamber's version of the FY2025 regular appropriations acts do not apply to the CR unless specified otherwise. See CRS Report R48517, Section-by-Section Summary of the Full-Year Continuing Appropriations Act, 2025 (Division A of P.L. 119-4), coordinated by Drew C. Aherne.

39.

Ibid.

40.

Section 11204 of P.L. 119-4.

41.

State Department (Biden Administration), Fiscal Year 2022 Agency Financial Report: Data Informed Diplomacy, p. 116, at https://www.state.gov/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/FY-2022-Agency-Financial-Report.pdf.

42.

State Department, FY2025 Congressional Budget Justification, Department of State Diplomatic Engagement, Appendix 1, p. 8; Testimony of Deputy Secretary of State for Management and Resources Richard Verma at U.S. Congress, Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, Modernization and Management: Building a Department to Address 21st Century Challenges, 118th Cong., 2nd sess., May 16, 2024. The State Department has long kept a share of personnel in training, but as Deputy Secretary Verma noted in his testimony, "the vast majority" have been in foreign language training. Such positions are excluded from the 250 training positions referred to in the text.

43.

State Department, FY2025 Congressional Budget Justification, Department of State Diplomatic Engagement, Appendix 1, p. 16.

44.

Ibid., pp. 82-87, 150.

45.

Ibid., p. 61.

46.

Ibid., p. 60. The State Department's Reasonable Accommodations Policy, as noted in the Foreign Affairs Manual, states that "reasonable accommodation for a disability is a change in the work environment or in the application process that would enable a person with a disability to enjoy equal employment opportunities." For more detail, see State Department, Foreign Affairs Manual, 3 FAM 3670, at https://fam.state.gov/fam/03fam/03fam3670.html.

47.

H.Rept. 118-554, p. 7.

48.

Section 7070 of H.R. 8771.

49.

S.Rept. 118-200, p. 6.

50.

Ibid., pp. 10-12.

51.

Jory Heckman, "These are the State Department offices hit hardest by widespread layoffs," Federal News Network, July 25, 2025. For State Department resources for employees separating as a result of the RIF, see https://www.state.gov/rifqs/.

52.

Executive Order 14210, "Implementing the President's "Department of Government Efficiency" Workforce Optimization Initiative," 90 Federal Register 9669, February 14, 2025.

53.

Title VII, General Provisions, is not included in the report because it generally does not include appropriations. Title VII includes guidance and restrictions on the use of the funds appropriated in the other titles.

54.

For more on USAID, see CRS In Focus IF10261, U.S. Agency for International Development: An Overview, by Emily M. McCabe.

55.

State Department, FY2025 Congressional Budget Justification, Foreign Operations, Appendix 2, pp. 127-128.

56.

H.Rept. 118-554, p. 36.

57.

H.Rept. 118-554, p. 40.

58.

The Pandemic Fund is a World Bank-hosted effort to "[provide] a dedicated stream of additional, long-term financing to strengthen critical pandemic prevention, preparedness, and response capabilities in low- and middle-income countries through investments and technical support at the national, regional, and global levels." For more, see https://www.thepandemicfund.org/background.

59.

The International Affairs budget function (Function 150) also includes Food for Peace Act Title II Grants (FFP), which is considered to be a humanitarian assistance account but is funded through the Agriculture appropriations bill. For FFP funding information, see Table A-2.

60.

State Department, FY2025 Congressional Budget Justification, Foreign Operations, Appendix 2, p. 266.

61.

For more on the Peace Corps, see CRS Report RS21168, The Peace Corps: Overview and Issues, by Nick M. Brown. For more on MCC, see CRS Report RL32427, Millennium Challenge Corporation: Overview and Issues, by Nick M. Brown.

62.

U.S. Department of the Treasury, International Programs Congressional Budget Justification, FY2025, pp. 57-59.

63.

H.Rept. 118-554, p. 146.

64.

H.Rept. 118-554, p. 62.

65.

S. 4797 and its accompanying report, S.Rept. 118-200, include provisions related to fentanyl in other sections (e.g., Section 7036).

66.

For more on Ex-Im Bank, see CRS In Focus IF10017, Export-Import Bank of the United States (Ex-Im Bank), by Shayerah I. Akhtar. For more on DFC, see CRS In Focus IF11436, U.S. International Development Finance Corporation (DFC), by Shayerah I. Akhtar and Nick M. Brown. For more on USTDA, see CRS In Focus IF10673, U.S. Trade and Development Agency (TDA), by Shayerah I. Akhtar.

67.

For more on this, see CRS Report R48517, Section-by-Section Summary of the Full-Year Continuing Appropriations Act, 2025 (Division A of P.L. 119-4), coordinated by Drew C. Aherne.

68.

Letter from Russell Vought, Director of the Office of Management and Budget, to President Trump, May 28, 2025, https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2025/03/Proposed-Rescissions-of-Budgetary-Resources.pdf.