Pentagon pegs Iran war cost at $25bn, munitions lead

A first public cost estimate lands on Capitol Hill

The US military campaign against Iran has cost an estimated $15 billion so far, according to testimony delivered in Congress by the Pentagon’s top budget official. The figure is the most complete public estimate to date for the conflict, which began on Feb. 28 when the US and Israel launched their campaign. The disclosure came during a House Armed Services Committee hearing that was formally focused on the Pentagon’s budget, but quickly moved to war spending and resourcing.

Acting Pentagon Comptroller Jules Hurst III provided the estimate while appearing alongside Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth. Lawmakers asked directly for the total cost so far and whether the administration would seek additional funding. Hurst said the estimate reflects spending to date, with most of the money tied to ammunition and munitions.

What the Pentagon told lawmakers

Hurst told the House Armed Services Committee that “approximately” $15 billion has been spent so far on the operation, described in the hearing as Operation Epic Fury. He said “most of that is” ammunition, and added that a portion of the cost also covers operations and maintenance as well as equipment replacement.

The comptroller did not provide a detailed breakdown of what specific items are included in the estimate. Reporting cited in the material also noted the Pentagon did not specify whether the $15 billion figure includes projected rebuilding and repair costs for base infrastructure in the Middle East that may have been damaged during the conflict.

The hearing marked a key moment for lawmakers seeking clarity on a fast-moving war and its fiscal impact. While the committee’s session was centered on the Pentagon’s broader budget planning, questions on war costs and munitions consumption became a focal point.

Why munitions dominate the spending

Hurst’s testimony emphasized that the bulk of spending is tied to munitions. Separately reported figures underscore how quickly costs can accumulate when high-value weapons are expended at scale. The Washington Post reported that the opening two days of the war cost $1.6 billion in munitions alone, according to Pentagon estimates cited in March reporting.

Other publicly reported estimates referenced in the material include a Pentagon closed-door briefing figure that the first six days of fighting cost $11.3 billion, and an estimate that destroyed or damaged US hardware in the first 100 hours of fighting could be around $1.5 billion. These figures were presented as earlier snapshots of spending intensity rather than as the definitive total.

Supplemental funding: timing still unclear

The Pentagon said a supplemental request will be routed through the White House and sent to Congress once there is a “full assessment” of the conflict’s cost. Hurst indicated that while the department is formulating a request, it is not ready to provide a specific supplemental figure immediately.

Separately, the material referenced discussions among administration officials of a possible supplemental request of up to $1.2 billion to pay for the conflict and weapons replenishment, while also noting officials have stressed publicly that they have not settled on a final price tag for any such request. Taken together, the testimony and surrounding reporting point to an evolving funding picture, with the Pentagon signaling it wants more time to quantify total requirements.

The hearing’s broader backdrop: the FY27 budget debate

The war-cost discussion unfolded alongside wider scrutiny of US defense spending plans. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth told lawmakers that raising the next year’s Pentagon budget to $1.5 trillion would help maintain US military capability across multiple theaters. Republicans and Democrats used the hearing to argue over strategy, with Democrats pressing for clarity on objectives and costs.

The Joint Chiefs of Staff chair, Gen. Dan Caine, also addressed the committee and described a goal of providing candid assessments to civilian leadership. The appearance was framed as Hegseth’s first public questioning on the Iran war on Capitol Hill since the conflict began.

Conflict timeline and key figures

The war was described as being on its 60th day at the time of the reporting, placing the estimate in the context of a still-developing campaign. While a ceasefire was referenced as being in place in the material, it also noted that talks on ending the war had stalled.

And beyond the US budget debate, the reporting included indicators of regional and global strain, including a sharp rise in Pakistan’s weekly oil import bill to $1.8 billion from $1.3 billion before the conflict, and Iran’s rial touching a record level of 1.8 million to $1.

Market and investor relevance: what is measurable

For investors, the most concrete data points in the material relate to the scale and composition of US war spending and the pressure on high-tech munitions stockpiles. The Pentagon estimate and associated figures highlight that procurement and replenishment of missiles and bombs can drive large, fast-moving budget needs.

The discussion of a future supplemental request, pending a “full assessment,” matters because it determines whether war costs will be absorbed within existing allocations or require additional appropriations. The hearing also connected the conflict to debates on overall defense outlays, with the administration discussing a $1.5 trillion Pentagon budget request for 2027.

On the global macro side, the cited rise in Pakistan’s oil import bill provides a numeric example of how the conflict period coincided with higher energy costs for an importing economy. The reported slide in Iran’s currency to 1.8 million per $1 also illustrates stress inside Iran’s economy, though the material does not quantify broader spillovers beyond the included examples.

Why this estimate matters

The $15 billion estimate is significant because it represents a clear, on-the-record figure delivered to lawmakers by the Pentagon comptroller, after weeks of partial estimates and press-reported snapshots. Hurst’s emphasis that most spending is on munitions also frames what the Pentagon is likely monitoring most closely: weapons consumption, operations tempo, and replacement needs.

But the estimate also comes with caveats. Hurst did not explain exactly what the $15 billion includes, and reporting noted uncertainty around whether future infrastructure repair costs in the Middle East are counted. That leaves room for revisions as assessments continue and as the Pentagon prepares any supplemental submission.

What happens next

The Pentagon’s next step, as stated in the hearing, is to complete a fuller cost assessment and then send a supplemental request through the White House to Congress. Lawmakers are likely to keep pressing for greater detail on what the $15 billion covers, how quickly munitions will need replenishment, and what additional costs may follow from equipment replacement and regional infrastructure impacts.