NextFin News - The war with Iran is costing the United States about $38 billion through August 1 and is projected to keep burning through $2 billion to $3 billion every month, and the Navy is the service where the strain has become impossible to hide: Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Daryl Caudle says he needs $6 billion to $8 billion just to make his fiscal 2026 accounts "whole and solvent," while carriers log the longest deployments since the Vietnam War and a blockade fleet of more than two dozen ships runs up a bill that has topped $7 billion since January.
The tension at the heart of the story is simple and uncomfortable: the 2026 Navy budget, close to $300 billion, was written for a peacetime force-generation model, and Operation Epic Fury was never baked into it. The result is a three-way squeeze that is only now becoming visible in the numbers - money pulled from maintenance accounts to pay for combat, sailors kept at sea for eight months and longer without a port call, and a global posture that has left the western Pacific without a US carrier for at least a month.
The Budget Hole: A War the FY26 Budget Never Priced In
The arithmetic starts with the Congressional Budget Office. In a 19-page analysis released on September 15, the nonpartisan scorekeeper put the cost of the war at roughly $38 billion through August 1 and projected that it would continue to run at $2 billion to $3 billion a month. That figure tracks closely with the $37.5 billion Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth gave Congress in late July, but it carries a warning the Pentagon's own number did not: rebuilding depleted stockpiles could take "at least five years," and the office said its analysis was limited because the Defense Department did not respond to its requests for information.
Those costs are not abstract. The budget office said they reflect the price of replacing expended munitions and equipment lost in battle, increased flying hours, other operations and higher fuel costs. The Pentagon's inspector general, in the first comprehensive public accounting of the war's materiel toll, put the total at $33.4 billion as of June 29 - including $22.3 billion in used munitions and $3.7 billion in equipment losses. The same report said Iranian strikes damaged or destroyed hundreds of buildings and structures at US bases across Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar, the United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Oman and Jordan, including Naval Support Activity Bahrain, home to the Fifth Fleet, and the Combined Air Operations Center at Al Udeid Air Base in Qatar. It counted 417 service members wounded and seven killed.
The White House has tried to answer this with a supplemental request. In June it sent Congress an $87.6 billion package, of which $67.1 billion is for defense. The single largest line is $21 billion to refill munitions, followed by $17.3 billion for the operational costs of the war. In July the House folded a $95 billion war-funding plan into a broader budget reconciliation package. But the money has not cleared Congress, and the Navy is living in the gap.
"The Fiscal Year 26 budget did not have Epic Fury baked into it. So, there's a supplemental out there and that number keeps growing, but for me that's probably between $6-8 billion in the total Department of War supplemental that I need to be whole and solvent for FY 26," Caudle said on August 26.
That $6 billion to $8 billion is being covered, in the meantime, by transfers inside an already tight budget. Documents and interviews have shown payroll accounts being raided to fund combat operations, and the service pulling money from the operations and maintenance account - the pot that pays for day-to-day readiness, training and repairs. The compounding problem is that the FY27 defense budget request, a record $1.5 trillion split among a $1.1 trillion base budget, a $350 billion reconciliation request and the pending supplemental, was also built before the war's full duration was known. Its $76.3 billion munitions request was already a stretch before thousands of missiles and bombs were expended in the opening months of the fight.
The mechanism here is straightforward, and it is the reason the budget strain matters beyond this year's ledger. When a service funds a war by moving money out of operations and maintenance, it is paying for today's combat with tomorrow's readiness. The ships still sail and the planes still fly, but deferred maintenance, cut training hours and postponed repairs accumulate as a hidden liability that shows up later as longer shipyard periods, lower inspection scores and a fleet that is present on paper but less available in practice.
The Sailor Strain: Record Deployments and a Force Generation Model Breaking
If the budget strain is the hidden liability, the deployment strain is the visible one. The Navy's force-generation model is built around a predictable three-year cycle with a seven-month, 210-day deployment. Between 2018 and 2022 most deployments landed within a few days of that target. Since October 2023 that model has been breaking, and the Iran war has finished the job.
USS Gerald R. Ford returned in May from a 326-day deployment, the longest by a US carrier since the Vietnam War, completed despite a 30-hour laundry-space fire in March that left some 600 sailors without bunks. USS Abraham Lincoln, which left San Diego on November 21, 2025 and was due home in May, is on track for more than 300 days at sea - the second-longest since Vietnam - and its crew spent eight-and-a-half months without a single port call, setting a modern record for consecutive days at sea. Since the October 2023 Hamas attack on Israel and the subsequent Houthi threat to commercial shipping, carrier deployments have averaged 8.5 months, according to the USNI News carrier deployment database.
"We've been in conflict pretty much the whole time I've been in the seat, and that's certainly stressed the force," Caudle said. "We do these extensions in little chunks, and the families don't see any endpoint so they can plan their own lives. That creates a lot of stress for sailors."
The human cost has surfaced in ways the Navy first tried to downplay. Roughly 200 family members brought complaints about food shortages, water problems, lost mail and mental-health fears to Acting Navy Secretary Hung Cao and two three-star commanders at town halls in San Diego. A sailor went overboard on August 3 and was recovered within the hour. The service initially said it had not observed an increase in suicidal ideations or attempts aboard the Lincoln; by August 14 its language had changed. "A small number of mental health cases were treated with no loss of life," Cao wrote, adding that the carrier "was extended because the mission demanded it" and that additional counselors and social workers were being sent.
The Navy's senior enlisted sailor has been more candid about what the cycle is doing to the force. Master Chief Petty Officer of the Navy John Perryman called the current cycle a "conveyor belt that's very prescriptive" born of a "peacetime mindset" and said the service would "have to come up with a different force generation model."
"[Sailors] will go do really hard things for me without really batting an eye because they like that part of it. But we do have to be able, when possible, to stick to schedules and be very honest, like we are with Roosevelt," Perryman said. "They know they're going to be there longer than seven months. Their commanding officer is giving them eight months to plan on."
The next ship in the cycle, USS Theodore Roosevelt, is expected to move to the Middle East for a deployment that will last more than seven months. The Navy has built a logistics chain to sustain two carrier strike groups on station in the Arabian Sea, pulling parts from Singapore, Japan and the Philippines and running replenishment at sea in a systematic way. Caudle calls it the "combat logistics force treadmill," and says it is now in a better place than during the Abraham Lincoln's early struggles. But a treadmill is not a fix; it is a way of keeping a broken cadence going.
The Readiness Trade: What the Middle East Is Costing the Pacific
The third strain is the one that does not show up in a budget line or a sailor's complaint: the global posture the war is forcing the Navy to abandon. Relief for the Abraham Lincoln is coming from the one place the National Defense Strategy says it should not. USS George Washington, the only American carrier homeported abroad, at Yokosuka, left the South China Sea in mid-August to take over the Arabian Sea station. That leaves the western Pacific without a US carrier for at least a month, according to Hudson Institute analyst Bryan Clark, with the largest American naval formation in the region an amphibious ready group built around USS Tripoli.
Beijing has noticed. The carrier Liaoning and its group have been operating in the Philippine Sea and the South China Sea, China and Russia held their Joint Sea exercise in July, and China test-fired a submarine-launched ballistic missile the same month.
"They're using this as part of the narrative to demonstrate to the Philippines, to Japan, to Indonesia and others that the U.S. is not the big dog in the western Pacific anymore," Clark said.
The magazine tells the same story as the map. Using public expenditure data, production rates and inventory estimates, the Center for Strategic and International Studies assessed at the end of July that the United States had fired about 65 percent of its Patriot interceptors between February and the end of July. A defense strategy published seven months before the war ranked the Middle East behind two other theaters - and the force is now structured around the theater it was supposed to be pivoting away from.
The blockade itself has become a substantial and recurring expense. At least 28 Navy ships have rotated through the blockade that began on July 14, racking up an estimated bill of more than $2 billion in ship operating costs. Since the naval buildup began in January, those costs have topped $7.1 billion, according to an analysis of the blockade's naval operations. That price tag does not include all of the US assets being used to escort tankers through the Strait of Hormuz.
The bill to come is already visible in the shipbuilding pipeline. Carriers pushed this hard "will be lined up to get into the shipyard," Clark has warned, and the United States has only two yards that can take them. USS John F. Kennedy began acceptance trials in August and is due for delivery in March 2027, about two years late. The decision to put steam catapults back on USS Doris Miller means a redesign that Clark estimates could push that ship from about 2034 to the end of the next decade. A carrier fleet of 11 hulls - ten Nimitz-class ships and the Ford - cannot absorb years of deferred maintenance and still meet a two-ocean commitment.
The Counter-Thesis: Can the Navy Absorb This?
The strongest case against the strain narrative is that the Navy has been here before and has absorbed worse. The service funded the Iraq and Afghanistan wars for years through supplemental appropriations that Congress ultimately passed, and it has weathered extended deployments in the past without a readiness collapse. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has maintained that the Pentagon can continue fighting with the arsenal it has, and President Donald Trump has called the Abraham Lincoln's deployment "not nearly long enough," framing endurance as a feature rather than a failure. From this view, the $6 billion to $8 billion Caudle says he needs is a rounding error against a $1.5 trillion defense request, and Congress will provide it, as it always has, once the politics clear.
There is real weight to that argument. The House has already passed a $95 billion war-funding plan, and the White House has asked for $87.6 billion. The money is likely to arrive - eventually. And the Navy has, by its own account, "cracked" the at-sea replenishment problem that nearly broke the Abraham Lincoln early in the deployment.
But the counter-thesis rests on two assumptions that the current evidence does not support. First, it assumes the supplemental arrives on a timeline that matters. The Iraq and Afghanistan wars were backed by authorizations to use military force; this conflict is not, and lawmakers have openly questioned whether Congress is obliged to pay for a conflict it did not authorize. Every month of delay means another month of money pulled from maintenance accounts and training budgets - a transfer whose cost compounds even if the principal is eventually repaid.
Second, it assumes the force can be stretched indefinitely without breaking something that money cannot quickly fix. You can replenish munitions. You cannot replenish a carrier hull that has burned an extra hundred days at sea, and you cannot instantly rebuild a pilot and maintainer workforce whose retention is already a stated concern - Hegseth ordered a review of strike fighter squadron retention in a March memo, and the Navy is paying tens of thousands of dollars a year in bonuses to keep aircrew. The falsifying signal for the strain thesis is specific: if the supplemental passes before the end of the fiscal year, if carrier deployments return to the 210-day target for two consecutive cycles, and if the western Pacific sees a carrier continuously on station for six months, then the readiness trade was temporary and manageable. None of those three conditions currently holds.
What Comes Next: Beneficiaries, the Exposed, and the Signals to Watch
The near-term picture is one of continued pressure with a narrow escape hatch. The CBO projects the war will add half a percentage point to inflation into the first quarter of 2027, driven largely by reduced oil and natural gas shipments through the Strait of Hormuz and disruptions to Red Sea shipping. That inflation channel is the second-order effect that links a naval blockade to a household's gas bill: the Navy holds the strait open just enough to keep some oil flowing, but not open enough to restore pre-war volumes, and the margin shows up at the pump.
In the short term, the beneficiaries are the defense contractors positioned to refill the magazine - munitions producers, missile integrators and the two shipyards that will absorb the deferred maintenance bill. The exposed are the sailors and their families, the Fifth Fleet's regional basing network that now needs rebuilding, and the Pacific posture that has been hollowed to pay for the Middle East commitment. The asymmetry is stark: the costs of the war are concentrated in the Navy's people and platforms, while the inflation cost is spread across every American household.
The forward look breaks cleanly across three horizons. In the short term, watch the supplemental: if Congress passes a version of the $87.6 billion request before fiscal year-end, the immediate cash-flow pressure eases. In the medium term, watch deployments: the Theodore Roosevelt's cycle and whatever follows it will show whether the Navy can return toward seven months or is locked into eight-to-nine. In the long term, watch the shipyards and the pipeline: the John F. Kennedy's March 2027 delivery and the Doris Miller's redesigned timeline are the canaries for whether the fleet can regenerate after the war ends.
The base case is that Congress eventually funds the war, the deployments stay long but stop lengthening, and the Navy limps back toward its force-generation model over the back half of the decade. The downside case is a prolonged conflict that keeps two carriers in the Arabian Sea through 2027, forces the Kennedy into the fleet before its post-shakedown availability is complete, and leaves the Pacific without a reliable carrier presence for months at a time. The upside case is a negotiated de-escalation that lets the Navy bring deployments back toward 210 days and redirect the $76.3 billion munitions request from replacement to modernization.
The war's true cost will not be the $38 billion, or even the $2 billion to $3 billion a month still to come. It will be the readiness the Navy spent to fight it - and that bill does not come due when Congress votes. It comes due the next time the fleet is asked to be in two oceans at once.
Explore more exclusive insights at nextfin.ai.
