The Defense Department will use unobligated funds from its research and development account to pay troops as the government shutdown continues, but it remains unclear what legal authority allows the move — raising questions about whether it could violate the Anti-deficiency Act.
), who has faced mounting calls to bring lawmakers back to the floor to vote on the Pay Our Troops Act of 2026 that would ensure service members, DoD civilians, Coast Guard personnel and contractors are paid during the shutdown.
A transfer moves funds from one appropriations account to another, while a reprogramming involves shifting funds within the same account.
Ultimately, it would be up to this administration to decide whether to prosecute any Anti-deficiency Act violation by the Defense Department.
Reconciliation funds Transferring $8 billion to pay troops offers only a temporary fix — enough to cover one pay period — and it’s unclear what the administration’s plan is if the shutdown drags on for another two weeks or longer.
Due to the ongoing government shutdown, the Defense Department will pay troops with unobligated funds from its research and development account. However, it is unclear what legal authority permits this action, which raises concerns about potential violations of the Anti-deficiency Act.
As the shutdown enters its third week, President Trump gave Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth instructions over the weekend to “use all available funds to get our Troops PAID on October 15th.”.
first in the United States. S. . Service members were getting ready to miss their paychecks this Wednesday after the Senate was unable to pass legislation like the Pay Our Troops Act and a stopgap funding measure. Similar measures made sure that troops were paid during previous shutdowns.
The Pentagon “has identified approximately $8 billion of unobligated research development testing and evaluation funds (RDTandE) from the prior fiscal year that will be used to issue mid-month paychecks to service members in the event the funding lapse continues past October 15th,” a Pentagon spokesperson told Federal News Network. “.”.
The action lessens the strain on Speaker of the House Mike Johnson (R-La). ), who has been the target of growing calls to call lawmakers back to the floor to vote on the Pay Our Troops Act of 2026, which would guarantee that contractors, Coast Guard members, DoD civilians, and service members are paid during the shutdown. “The House already did its job, it’s called the continuing resolution,” Johnson has previously said, dismissing that option. “.”.
Legal concerns are raised regarding the administration’s authority to reallocate such a substantial amount during a shutdown, even though the decision to transfer $8 billion from the research and development account keeps service members from going without pay this week for the first time in history.
Since I have not seen in writing what they are attempting to accomplish or what authority they claim to have, I am unable to understand how this is now legal. “I can’t say that it’s definitely illegal, but I think that there’s an obvious question here: if you can pay the troops using unobligated funds, which the Department of Defense has every day of the year— why wasn’t this done 12 years ago during the last shutdown? Why did Congress have to enact the Pay Our Military Act last time? Now, it’s supposedly not necessary,” a former defense official told Federal News Network.
Authority to transfer limits.
Limited authority granted by Congress to the Defense Department to use funds for purposes other than those initially authorized by Congress permits the department to transfer or repurpose funds under specific circumstances. Funds are moved from one appropriations account to another during a transfer, but they are moved within the same account during a reprogramming.
Additionally, when a transfer occurs, the statute mandates that the defense secretary notify Congress.
The Defense Appropriations Act and the National Defense Authorization Act typically contain recurrent General Transfer Authority provisions that cap the amount that the Defense Department can transfer between or within appropriations. The 2025 continuing resolution expanded DoD’s ability to move funds between appropriations accounts from $6 billion to $8 billion to address urgent priorities, but only for the fiscal 2025 funding period.
“They won’t have that authority left if they need $8 billion.”. Thus, I am unsure of the strategy in place,” a former employee of the House Appropriations Committee told Federal News Network.
In our radically altered dynamic, the Office of Management and Budget has largely ignored the views of the Government Accountability Office regarding the spending power. We are therefore in a time when the executive branch is pushing the boundaries of its authority, especially in relation to the purse power. This is merely one more illustration of it. “I’m not shocked that this is occurring at all, and it establishes a precedent for it to occur repeatedly on both sides,” the former employee stated.
Additionally, Rich Brady, the CEO of the Society of Defense Financial Management, noted that, in contrast to operations and maintenance accounts, which are funded annually, research and development funds are a two-year appropriation.
They have some flexibility in that account because the research and development funds that were appropriated in 2025 are good for obligation in fiscal 2025 and fiscal 2026—two years. The issue is, “How much can they lawfully transfer over and use for military pay purposes? It probably won’t add up to the full $8 billion that they’re talking about,” Brady told Federal News Network.
hazards related to the law.
The Anti-deficiency Act, which gives Congress the legal authority to regulate federal spending by forbidding federal agencies from spending money without appropriations, may be violated by the Defense Department’s decision to use funds from previous years to pay for new commitments. This is just one of the legal concerns that could arise.
Whether or not the Defense Department violates the Anti-deficiency Act would ultimately be up to this administration.
The individuals who carry out the work may be breaking the Anti-deficiency Act, which carries criminal penalties for deliberate infractions. It takes a lot of effort to demonstrate that a violation was voluntary, of course. That is rarely the case. Nobody would likely face severe legal repercussions, the former DoD official stated.
“It could have been calculated that nobody would have the audacity to protest paying the troops, kosher or not,” the defense official continued.
Officials who authorized or carried out the payments may be protected by internal legal advice, such as an OMB opinion or the General Counsel of the Defense Department. Congress, however, is rarely given access to these documents.
The department might be investigated for going beyond its statutory authority or violating congressional intent in addition to possible Anti-deficiency Act violations; Congress may review or address these issues in the upcoming appropriations cycle.
“I am unable to state with certainty that there is an outside agency or organization that could intervene and hold the administration responsible for using these funds contrary to what Congress has requested. Ultimately, I believe that everyone wants and most people would agree that our military personnel need to be paid. This is one way to do that, but it would be going against congressional intent because it is assumed that they do not have full transfer authority, Brady said.
Johnson has already responded to Democrats who challenged the administration’s decision and questioned whether President Trump’s plan to use R&D funds to pay service members was legal.
Johnson stated on Tuesday that the Democrats should “bring it if they want to go to court and challenge troops being paid.”.
Requests for comments on whether the Defense Department informed the House and Senate Appropriations committees of the fund transfer were not answered.
Money for reconciliation.
The $8 billion that has been transferred to pay troops is only a short-term solution, covering one pay period. If the shutdown continues for two weeks or more, it is unclear what the administration’s plan will be.
The department could also use money from the reconciliation package, also known as the “One Big Beautiful Bill,” which was signed into law in July. However, the bill’s wording is so specific that any transfers would still be capped at $8 billion, which was established in the fiscal 2025 continuing resolution.
Please email Anastasia if you would like to speak with this reporter regarding recent changes in the federal government. obis@federalnewsnetwork . com or (301) 830-2747 on Signal.
Federal News Network, copyright © 2025. Every right reserved. Users from the European Economic Area are not supposed to use this website.
