Wednesday, September 16, 2026Independent tracking of the National Defense Authorization Act

The hub for the National Defense Authorization Act — status, history, and analysis

Guide · Updated September 13, 2026

H.R. 8800 vs S. 4784: House vs Senate FY2027 NDAA

TL;DR

The House and Senate wrote different FY2027 defense authorization bills. H.R. 8800 ($1.15T, passed July 22, 2026, 216–212) leans into right-to-repair provisions and shipbuilding, including $500M for a second destroyer. S. 4784 ($1.14T, approved by the Senate Armed Services Committee) never reached the floor after cloture failed 50–46 on July 14, 2026. The chambers must reconcile the texts in conference before anything becomes law.

Side by side

H.R. 8800 vs S. 4784 at a glance
House — H.R. 8800Senate — S. 4784
Topline$1.15T$1.14T
Sections723611
CommitteeHASC reportedSASC reported
Floor actionPassed Jul 22, 2026, 216–212Cloture failed Jul 14, 2026, 50–46 — stalled
Signature issuesRight to repair, second destroyerTopline restraint, Iran language

Where they differ most

  • Right to repair. The House bill's right-to-repair provisions push the Pentagon to secure technical data and repair rights — a centerpiece the Senate version treats more cautiously.
  • Shipbuilding. The House funds a second destroyer ($500M) and backs Sec. 123 multiyear destroyer procurement; track it all in the destroyer & shipbuilding topic.
  • Iran & Middle East language. Competing Iran provisions are a major source of the Senate stalemate.
  • Acquisition reform. Both bills extend the portfolio model from P.L. 119-60 — see the acquisition-reform sections.

Compare the text yourself

Don't take our word for it — the House vs Senate diff tool shows word-level comparisons of H.R. 8800 vs S. 4784 for every section, filterable by title, topic, or department. For the full annotated text, browse all 723 FY2027 sections.

Context