Trump’s $1.2 Trillion 'Golden Dome' Missile Defense System Faces Cost Surge, CBO Warns

President Donald Trump’s proposed Golden Dome national missile defense system could cost U.S. taxpayers up to $1.2 trillion over two decades, according to a new analysis by the Congressional Budget Office (CBO). The estimate, released in response to a 2025 executive order directing the Defense Department to develop a ground- and space-based system, far exceeds Trump’s original projection of $175 billion.

CBO’s Cost Breakdown and Timeline

The CBO report estimates that acquisition costs alone would total just over $1 trillion, with the space-based interceptor layer accounting for 70% of that total. The remaining costs include operations, maintenance, and upgrades. While the timeline for completion remains unspecified, the CBO notes that developing space-based interceptors "will probably take at least several years."

The report also highlights significant logistical challenges, including the need to ramp up production of interceptors and radars—particularly those depleted or destroyed during the Iran war. The CBO warns that the project’s success depends on the U.S. industrial base’s ability to meet these demands.

Comparisons to Israel’s Iron Dome and Reagan’s 'Star Wars'

Proponents of the Golden Dome have drawn parallels to Israel’s Iron Dome, a short-range missile defense system. However, experts argue the comparison is flawed. William Hartung, senior research fellow at the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, has cautioned that Israel’s system is designed to intercept short-range rockets, not intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs).

"Israel’s Iron Dome would be of no use against an incoming intercontinental ballistic missile." Long-range interceptors have failed many tests, and those tests were considerably less rigorous than an actual attack would be. That a new initiative would do better is both unproven and unlikely."

The Golden Dome’s scope—covering the entire continental U.S., Alaska, and Hawaii—further complicates its feasibility compared to Israel’s Iron Dome, which protects a much smaller area.

Critics Draw Parallels to Reagan’s Failed 'Star Wars' Initiative

Opponents of the Golden Dome project have likened it to Ronald Reagan’s Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI), nicknamed "Star Wars," which was announced in 1983. The SDI aimed to create a space-based missile defense system capable of protecting the U.S. from a large-scale nuclear attack. However, the project was deemed technologically unfeasible, and the Clinton administration terminated it in 1993 after spending $30 billion.

In June 2025, Sen. Jeff Merkley (D–Ore.) referenced the SDI’s failures in a letter to the CBO director, warning of the "risks of repeating history." Given the Golden Dome’s "sweeping scope and strategic risks," Merkley urged the CBO to investigate its costs and implications. He also raised concerns about the project’s potential shift in U.S. foreign policy, noting that it "explicitly aims to counter the strategic nuclear forces of Russia and China."

Experts Question the Project’s Strategic Value

Matthew Petti, writing for Reason in 2025, argued that America’s best defense against nuclear war has long been mutually assured destruction (MAD). He questioned whether the Golden Dome would provide meaningful protection or simply escalate global tensions.

The CBO’s report does not address the project’s strategic merits but underscores the financial and technical challenges ahead. With costs ballooning and feasibility in question, the Golden Dome’s future remains uncertain.