Global Economic Intersection
Advertisement
  • Home
  • Economics
  • Finance
  • Politics
  • Investments
    • Invest in Amazon $250
  • Cryptocurrency
    • Best Bitcoin Accounts
    • Bitcoin Robot
      • Quantum AI
      • Bitcoin Era
      • Bitcoin Aussie System
      • Bitcoin Profit
      • Bitcoin Code
      • eKrona Cryptocurrency
      • Bitcoin Up
      • Bitcoin Prime
      • Yuan Pay Group
      • Immediate Profit
      • BitQH
      • Bitcoin Loophole
      • Crypto Boom
      • Bitcoin Treasure
      • Bitcoin Lucro
      • Bitcoin System
      • Oil Profit
      • The News Spy
      • Bitcoin Buyer
      • Bitcoin Inform
      • Immediate Edge
      • Bitcoin Evolution
      • Cryptohopper
      • Ethereum Trader
      • BitQL
      • Quantum Code
      • Bitcoin Revolution
      • British Trade Platform
      • British Bitcoin Profit
    • Bitcoin Reddit
    • Celebrities
      • Dr. Chris Brown Bitcoin
      • Teeka Tiwari Bitcoin
      • Russell Brand Bitcoin
      • Holly Willoughby Bitcoin
No Result
View All Result
  • Home
  • Economics
  • Finance
  • Politics
  • Investments
    • Invest in Amazon $250
  • Cryptocurrency
    • Best Bitcoin Accounts
    • Bitcoin Robot
      • Quantum AI
      • Bitcoin Era
      • Bitcoin Aussie System
      • Bitcoin Profit
      • Bitcoin Code
      • eKrona Cryptocurrency
      • Bitcoin Up
      • Bitcoin Prime
      • Yuan Pay Group
      • Immediate Profit
      • BitQH
      • Bitcoin Loophole
      • Crypto Boom
      • Bitcoin Treasure
      • Bitcoin Lucro
      • Bitcoin System
      • Oil Profit
      • The News Spy
      • Bitcoin Buyer
      • Bitcoin Inform
      • Immediate Edge
      • Bitcoin Evolution
      • Cryptohopper
      • Ethereum Trader
      • BitQL
      • Quantum Code
      • Bitcoin Revolution
      • British Trade Platform
      • British Bitcoin Profit
    • Bitcoin Reddit
    • Celebrities
      • Dr. Chris Brown Bitcoin
      • Teeka Tiwari Bitcoin
      • Russell Brand Bitcoin
      • Holly Willoughby Bitcoin
No Result
View All Result
Global Economic Intersection
No Result
View All Result

Department of Defense’s Needs Significantly Exceed the Funding Available under the Budget Control Act

admin by admin
November 7, 2014
in Uncategorized
0
0
SHARES
15
VIEWS
Share on FacebookShare on Twitter

from the Congressional Budget Office

[Editor’s Note: Based on the recent election results with Republican control of the USA purse strings, this will become an entertaining discussion for the 114th Congress]

To provide information about its plans beyond the coming year, the Department of Defense (DoD) generally provides a five-year plan, called the Future Years Defense Program (FYDP), that is associated with the budget it submits to the Congress. Because decisions made in the near term can have consequences for the defense budget in the longer term, ….


CBO regularly examines DoD’s FYDP and projects its budgetary impact for roughly a decade beyond the period covered by the FYDP. For this analysis, CBO used the FYDP that was provided to the Congress in April 2014; it spans fiscal years 2015 to 2019, and CBO’s projections span the years 2015 to 2030.

For fiscal year 2015, DoD requested appropriations totaling $555 billion. Of that amount, $496 billion was for the base budget and $59 billion was for what are termed overseas contingency operations (OCO). The base budget covers programs that constitute the department’s normal activities, such as the development and procurement of weapon systems and the day-to-day operations of the military and civilian workforce. Funding for OCO pays for U.S. involvement in the war in Afghanistan and other nonroutine military activities elsewhere. The FYDP describes DoD’s plans for its normal activities and therefore generally corresponds to the base budget.

DoD’s 2015 plans differ from its 2014 plans in important ways. For example, in an effort to reduce costs, the current FYDP includes sizeable cuts in the number of military personnel, particularly in the Army.

CBO produced two projections of the base-budget costs of DoD’s plans as reflected in the FYDP and other longterm planning documents released by DoD. The “CBO projection” uses CBO’s estimates of the costs of military activities and the extent to which those costs will change over time; those estimates reflect DoD’s historical experience. The “FYDP and extension” starts with DoD’s estimates of the costs of its plans through 2019 and extends them beyond 2019 using DoD’s estimates if available and CBO’s projections of price and compensation trends for the overall economy if DoD’s estimates are not available. Neither projection should be viewed as a prediction of future funding for DoD’s activities; rather, the projections are estimates of the costs of executing the department’s current plans without changes.

The amount requested for the base budget in 2015 would comply with the limits on budget authority established by the Budget Control Act of 2011 as subsequently modified, hereafter referred to simply as the Budget Control Act (BCA). After 2015, however, the costs of DoD’s plans under both projections would significantly exceed CBO’s estimate of the funding the department would receive under the BCA, which limits appropriations for national defense through 2021. To remain in compliance with the BCA after 2015, DoD would have to make sharp additional cuts to the size of its forces, curtail the development and purchase of weapons, reduce the extent of its operations and training, or implement some combination of those three actions.

The Inflation-Adjusted Costs of DoD’s Plans Would Increase By 1.2 Percent Per Year Through 2030 Under the CBO Projection

The costs to implement DoD’s 2015 plans would increase over the next 15 years in real terms (that is, after adjusting to remove the effects of inflation). Under the CBO projection, the real cost of the plans would start at $497 billion in 2015, jump to $533 billion in 2016, and continue growing thereafter, reaching $541 billion in 2019 and $598 billion in 2030 (see Figure below). The average annual growth rate of the cost from 2015 to 2030 would be 1.2 percent, resulting in a 20 percentincrease over the next decade and a half. CBO projects that the two largest parts of DoD’s budget would increase by different amounts and with very different profiles over that period:

  • Operation and support (O&S)—which includes compensation for the department’s military and civilian employees, military health care, and various operation and maintenance activities—accounts for about two-thirds of the cost to implement DoD’s plans in 2015. CBO projects that those costs would rise fairly steadily between 2015 and 2030, with average growth of 1.1 percent a year in real terms and cumulative growth of 18 percent. That growth would occur despite a 6 percent decrease in the size of the military.
  • Acquisition—which includes research, development, test, and evaluation as well as procurement of weapon systems and other major equipment—accounts for about one-third of the cost to implement DoD’s plans in 2015. CBO projects that those costs would jump by 42 percent in real terms between 2015 and 2022 but then trend downward through 2030. Costs in 2030 would be 22 percent higher than in 2015.

Costs of DoD's Plans in the Context of the Budget Control Act

According to the CBO projection, the average real cost of DoD’s base-budget plans from 2015 through 2019 would exceed average spending for DoD from 1980 to 2014 by $64 billion a year. Moreover, the average real cost of DoD’s plans from 2015 through 2030 would exceed the 1980–2014 average by $105 billion a year.

The growth in DoD’s costs under the CBO projection would be somewhat less than CBO’s projection of the growth of the U.S. economy. Consequently, DoD’s costs as a share of gross domestic product (GDP) would decrease slowly over most of the projection period, from 2.8 percent of GDP in 2015 to 2.5 percent in 2025 and 2.3 percent in 2030.

The Inflation-Adjusted Costs of DoD’s Plans Would Increase By 1.0 Percent Per Year Through 2030 Under the FYDP and Extension

For most categories of DoD’s budget, costs under the CBO projection are higher than the costs estimated by DoD in the FYDP and the extrapolated costs for the extension of the FYDP. In particular, the growth reflectedin the CBO projection for military pay, the costs of developing and buying weapons, and the costs of providing health care is higher than the growth incorporated by DoD in the FYDP and extrapolated by CBO for the FYDP extension:

  • Using DoD’s estimates of costs and CBO’s extension of those estimates, the real cost of DoD’s plans would grow at an average annual rate of 1.0 percent between 2015 and 2030, or 0.2 percentage points more slowly than under the CBO projection.
  • Real O&S costs would rise by 1.0 percent a year, on average, during that period, or 0.1 percentage points more slowly than under the CBO projection.
  • Real costs for acquisition would increase by 32 percent between 2015 and 2022, 10 percentage points less than under the CBO projection. As in the CBO projection, those costs would decline between 2022 and 2030.

The Costs of DoD’s Plans Would Significantly Exceed the Limits Established by the Budget Control Act

Although DoD has scaled back its plans since last year, CBO estimates that the cost of those plans after 2015 would still significantly exceed the funding that would be provided to the department under the BCA, which limits discretionary appropriations through 2021. If DoD continues to receive its historical share of the national defense budget, CBO’s analysis yields three conclusions:

  • Under the CBO projection, the cumulative cost of DoD’s base-budget plans for 2015 through 2021 would be $332 billion, or about $47 billion a year, higher in nominal terms than the funding that would be provided to DoD under the limits set by the BCA. The gap would be $308 billion after adjusting for inflation.
  • Under the FYDP and extension, the cumulative cost of DoD’s base-budget plans for 2015 through 2021 would be $215 billion, or about $31 billion a year, higher in nominal terms than the funding that would be provided under the BCA. The gap would be $200 billion after adjusting for inflation.
  • Under either projection, the costs of DoD’s plans in the 2015 FYDP would be closer to the limits established by the BCA than would the costs of the plans in the 2014 FYDP. For example, between 2015 and 2021, the gap between the BCA’s limits and CBO’s projection for the 2015 plan is about half as large as the gap computed from CBO’s projection for the 2014 plan.

In any year for which discretionary appropriations are subject to the BCA, if the Congress appropriates more for DoD’s base budget than the amount permitted under the law, the difference between the appropriated amount and the BCA limit would be subject to sequestration (the cancellation of budgetary resources after they have been appropriated).

Previous Post

Median Household Wealth Declined over Past 25 Years

Next Post

It’s the Court, Stupid!

Related Posts

What Are BRC-30 Tokens?
Econ Intersect News

What Are BRC-30 Tokens?

by John Wanguba
June 2, 2023
XRP Explosive Boom Results In Record-Breaking Address Activity
Economics

XRP’s Explosive Boom Results In Record-Breaking Address Activity

by John Wanguba
June 1, 2023
What To Consider When Evaluating Low-Code And No-Code Platforms
Business

What To Consider When Evaluating Low-Code And No-Code Platforms

by John Wanguba
June 1, 2023
Crypto Bear Phase Gone, ‘Explosive’ Bull Market Imminent – Veteran Investor
Economics

Crypto Bear Phase Gone, ‘Explosive’ Bull Market Imminent – Veteran Investor

by John Wanguba
June 1, 2023
Only 2 Exchanges Registered In Hong Kong As Crypto Ban Is Removed
Economics

Only 2 Exchanges Registered In Hong Kong As Crypto Ban Is Removed

by John Wanguba
May 31, 2023
Next Post

It's the Court, Stupid!

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Browse by Category

  • Business
  • Econ Intersect News
  • Economics
  • Finance
  • Politics
  • Uncategorized

Browse by Tags

adoption altcoins bank banking banks Binance Bitcoin Bitcoin adoption Bitcoin market blockchain BTC business China crypto crypto adoption cryptocurrency crypto exchange crypto market crypto regulation decentralized finance DeFi Elon Musk ETH Ethereum Europe Federal Reserve finance FTX inflation investment market analysis Metaverse NFT nonfungible tokens oil market price analysis recession regulation Russia stock market technology Tesla the UK the US Twitter

Archives

  • June 2023
  • May 2023
  • April 2023
  • March 2023
  • February 2023
  • January 2023
  • December 2022
  • November 2022
  • October 2022
  • September 2022
  • August 2022
  • July 2022
  • June 2022
  • May 2022
  • April 2022
  • March 2022
  • February 2022
  • January 2022
  • December 2021
  • November 2021
  • October 2021
  • September 2021
  • August 2021
  • July 2021
  • June 2021
  • May 2021
  • April 2021
  • March 2021
  • February 2021
  • January 2021
  • December 2020
  • November 2020
  • October 2020
  • September 2020
  • August 2020
  • July 2020
  • June 2020
  • May 2020
  • April 2020
  • March 2020
  • February 2020
  • January 2020
  • December 2019
  • November 2019
  • October 2019
  • September 2019
  • August 2019
  • July 2019
  • June 2019
  • May 2019
  • April 2019
  • March 2019
  • February 2019
  • January 2019
  • December 2018
  • November 2018
  • October 2018
  • September 2018
  • August 2018
  • July 2018
  • June 2018
  • May 2018
  • April 2018
  • March 2018
  • February 2018
  • January 2018
  • December 2017
  • November 2017
  • October 2017
  • September 2017
  • August 2017
  • July 2017
  • June 2017
  • May 2017
  • April 2017
  • March 2017
  • February 2017
  • January 2017
  • December 2016
  • November 2016
  • October 2016
  • September 2016
  • August 2016
  • July 2016
  • June 2016
  • May 2016
  • April 2016
  • March 2016
  • February 2016
  • January 2016
  • December 2015
  • November 2015
  • October 2015
  • September 2015
  • August 2015
  • July 2015
  • June 2015
  • May 2015
  • April 2015
  • March 2015
  • February 2015
  • January 2015
  • December 2014
  • November 2014
  • October 2014
  • September 2014
  • August 2014
  • July 2014
  • June 2014
  • May 2014
  • April 2014
  • March 2014
  • February 2014
  • January 2014
  • December 2013
  • November 2013
  • October 2013
  • September 2013
  • August 2013
  • July 2013
  • June 2013
  • May 2013
  • April 2013
  • March 2013
  • February 2013
  • January 2013
  • December 2012
  • November 2012
  • October 2012
  • September 2012
  • August 2012
  • July 2012
  • June 2012
  • May 2012
  • April 2012
  • March 2012
  • February 2012
  • January 2012
  • December 2011
  • November 2011
  • October 2011
  • September 2011
  • August 2011
  • July 2011
  • June 2011
  • May 2011
  • April 2011
  • March 2011
  • February 2011
  • January 2011
  • December 2010
  • August 2010
  • August 2009

Categories

  • Business
  • Econ Intersect News
  • Economics
  • Finance
  • Politics
  • Uncategorized
Global Economic Intersection

After nearly 11 years of 24/7/365 operation, Global Economic Intersection co-founders Steven Hansen and John Lounsbury are retiring. The new owner, a global media company in London, is in the process of completing the set-up of Global Economic Intersection files in their system and publishing platform. The official website ownership transfer took place on 24 August.

Categories

  • Business
  • Econ Intersect News
  • Economics
  • Finance
  • Politics
  • Uncategorized

Recent Posts

  • What Are BRC-30 Tokens?
  • XRP’s Explosive Boom Results In Record-Breaking Address Activity
  • What To Consider When Evaluating Low-Code And No-Code Platforms

© Copyright 2021 EconIntersect - Economic news, analysis and opinion.

No Result
View All Result
  • Home
  • Contact Us
  • Bitcoin Robot
    • Bitcoin Profit
    • Bitcoin Code
    • Quantum AI
    • eKrona Cryptocurrency
    • Bitcoin Up
    • Bitcoin Prime
    • Yuan Pay Group
    • Immediate Profit
    • BitIQ
    • Bitcoin Loophole
    • Crypto Boom
    • Bitcoin Era
    • Bitcoin Treasure
    • Bitcoin Lucro
    • Bitcoin System
    • Oil Profit
    • The News Spy
    • British Bitcoin Profit
    • Bitcoin Trader
  • Bitcoin Reddit

© Copyright 2021 EconIntersect - Economic news, analysis and opinion.

en English
ar Arabicbg Bulgarianda Danishnl Dutchen Englishfi Finnishfr Frenchde Germanel Greekit Italianja Japaneselv Latvianno Norwegianpl Polishpt Portuguesero Romanianes Spanishsv Swedish