The Pentagon’s first public estimate put the Iran war at $25 billion, but lawmakers pressed officials over broader economic costs and the lack of an end date.
WASHINGTON — The Pentagon told Congress this week that the war with Iran has cost about $25 billion so far, offering its first public price tag for a conflict that lawmakers say remains poorly explained and far from fully accounted for.
The estimate, delivered Wednesday by acting Pentagon comptroller Jay Hurst during a House Armed Services Committee hearing, immediately became the center of a broader fight over what counts as the cost of war. Defense officials described the number as a current military tally, largely tied to weapons fired and operational expenses. Democrats and some outside economists argued that it excludes major costs already being felt by households, markets and U.S. forces overseas.
Hurst appeared alongside Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Gen. Dan Caine at a hearing formally focused on the Defense Department’s roughly $1.5 trillion budget request for next year. The Iran war, now described in the sources as roughly two months old and entering its third month, dominated the questioning.
Hurst said the department would work through the White House on a supplemental funding request once it has a fuller assessment and promised lawmakers a more detailed breakdown. The $25 billion estimate, he said, reflects “munitions expended” and other operational costs. In March, Pentagon officials had told Congress the war cost $11.3 billion in its first six days.
Lawmakers challenged whether the new figure gives the public a meaningful sense of the bill. Rep. Adam Smith of Washington, the committee’s top Democrat, pressed Hegseth on the administration’s strategy and the lack of a clear endpoint. Sen. Chris Coons of Delaware said he was “frankly certain” the $25 billion figure was low, arguing that it could not represent the full cost of deploying and sustaining U.S. forces in the region.
Rep. Ro Khanna of California pushed the dispute further, saying the wider economic cost could reach about $631 billion, or roughly $5,000 per household, because of higher gas and food prices. Harvard economist Linda Bilmes has projected that the total cost could ultimately reach $1 trillion, citing the history of U.S. wars costing far more than early government estimates once veterans’ care, weapons replacement and other long-term obligations are included.
Those figures are not the same kind of estimate. The Pentagon’s number is a direct war-spending figure from defense officials. The higher estimates attempt to capture broader economic consequences, including energy shocks and future obligations. That gap is at the heart of the dispute now facing Congress: whether the public cost should be measured by the Pentagon’s current ledger or by the wider burden on the U.S. economy and taxpayers.
The war’s effect on energy markets has sharpened that argument. With Iran controlling the Strait of Hormuz and the United States enforcing its own blockade, oil and commercial traffic through the Gulf have been severely disrupted. Gas prices in the United States have risen to $4.23 a gallon, according to the captured reporting, while Brent crude has traded above $120.
There are also unresolved questions about damage to U.S. facilities and the strain on weapons stockpiles. Hegseth declined to say whether the $25 billion estimate includes repairs to U.S. bases. Hurst has said the department does not yet have a final number for damage to overseas installations. Committee Chairman Mike Rogers, a Republican, warned that global munition stockpiles are low and that the United States lacks the capacity to rapidly refill them.
Hegseth defended the administration’s approach and accused critics in Congress of using “reckless, feckless, and defeatist words.” He also said Iran’s nuclear facilities had been “obliterated,” while acknowledging Iran had not given up its nuclear ambitions. NPR reported that Hegseth did not say when the war might end.
That leaves Congress with a partial price tag, competing definitions of cost and no firm timeline. The next test will be whether the Pentagon’s promised breakdown and any supplemental funding request clarify what the $25 billion covers — and what remains outside it.
Comments (0)