NDAA has military right to repair stripped from it in favor of data as a service

📰	This page or section is about an ongoing event. Check again later for more coverage.

The National Defense Authorization Act, or NDAA, is an annual bill that outlines the budget for the U.S. Department of Defense for the following fiscal year. Often, legislators add "rider" provisions or amendments to the NDAA unrelated to the defense budget in order to pass favorable legislation (including controversial legislation) that may not stand on its own.

The NDAA for fiscal year 2026 initially contained bipartisan right to repair language that has recently been removed by House representatives and replaced with language pertaining to "data-as-a-service". In this context, "Data-as-a-service" refers to contract models where the data, software access, and permissions required for repair are provided on a subscription or pay-per-use basis, as opposed to being included with purchase of the product, or provided freely on customer request as is the expectation when right-to-repair language is used.

Data-as-a-service provisions have been seen in Representatives' Mike Rogers and Adam Smith's SPEED Act, and its inclusion to the NDAA has been pushed by representatives whose campaigns have received major financial support from large contractors with the Pentagon.

Legislative outlook

Representatives supporting the change

Commentators have noted that the primary representatives pushing for language changes from right to repair to data-as-a-service have had their campaigns heavily supported by defense contractors:

• Representative Mike Rogers has received over $535,000 from the defense industry, the top sector that donates to his campaigns. He is a top recipient from the "Defense Electronics" industry, in particular. He has received $10,500 from Boeing and $66,650 from L3.
• Representative Adam Smith has received $310,550 from the defense industry, which is the second top sector that donates to his campaign. Palantir is Smith's #3 top contributor.

Stakeholders

The right to repair policy was supported by the Trump administration, by Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, Army Secretary Dan Driscoll, and by Navy Secretary John Phelan. In general, the larger defense contractors tend to strongly oppose military right to repair, while small- and medium-sized businesses who could compete for new repair contracts are more supportive of the military's right to repair.

Public response

Right to repair advocate Louis Rossmann commented on the relative effectiveness of the inclusion of data-as-a-service language in legislation as opposed to right to repair language, making the following points:

Data-as-a-service creates additional red tape

Currently, the Department of Defense (DoD) can negotiate for access to rights long-term (though contractors still have the upper hand).^{[citation needed]} Adding data-as-a-service/pay-per-use would mean the DoD must seek permission from contractors each time a repair, tool, or information (data) is needed. This tends to cause more delay in contested logistics environments with service members receiving only one-time access to repair information. More specifically, the data-as-a-service model requires the DoD to contract to a company's data library on a pay-per-use model, increasing overall costs and discouraging both DoD and other contractor competitors from providing repair services.

Similar response to other industries

Rossmann compared the data-as-a-service model upon military equipment to discussions within the automotive industry, such as the controversial Memorandum of Understanding used by car manufacturers who oppose the right to repair. Replacing right to repair in the NDAA with "data-as-a-service" gives the appearance of care and concern regarding repair restrictions. However, as with the automotive industry's Memorandum of Understanding, the results are the same - manufacturers block car owners and independent repairers from effectively repairing products and equipment.

Similarly, farm equipment company John Deere attempted to appease farmers with these tactics. Most recently was their release of a digital repair tool called Operations Center Pro Service,^{[citation needed]} a tool that requires internet access in rural areas including open fields where farm equipment may be located, and it also requires farmers to pay annual fees for access to repair data. Deere has tried this tactic before, releasing software it said fixed the problem but that meant farmers couldn't find or access the basic information they needed.

Rossmann made the point that these repair "services" result in restrictions upon consumers and higher profit for the manufacturers, even in the case of Pentagon contractors at the expense of the U.S. military.

In this case, while the primes seem to pretend to Secretary Hegseth that they care about this issue, their actions serve to undermine repairability.

Timeline

• January 2025: Senator Warren receives commitment from Secretary of the Army, Dan Driscoll, to work with her on tackling repair restrictions for the military.
• May 2025: Secretary Driscoll announced that the U.S. Army will ensure right to repair provisions are included in future Army contracts.
• May 2025 - Poll shows Americans support military right to repair by a nearly 7-to-1 margin.
• July 2025: Senators Warren and Tim Sheehy (R-Mont.) introduced the Warrior Right to Repair Act of 2025 - legislation that would require contractors to provide the Department of Defense (DoD) with access to technical data and materials the military needs to repair and maintain its own equipment.
• July 2025: A provision was secured with bipartisan support in the Senate Armed Services Committee for Fiscal Year 2026 NDAA. It includes portions of Senator Warren's bipartisan Warrior Right to Repair Act, and it guarantees all branches of the military the right to repair their equipment and requires contractors to provide all relevant repair information.
• July 2025 - Intellectual property legal experts send a letter to Congress stating that the Warrior Right to Repair Act is consistent with long-held law and it "presents no conflict with manufacturers' IP rights."
• September 2025: The White House announced support for Warren-Sheehy military right to repair policy.
• September 2025 - National Defense Industrial Association (NDIA) issues white paper opposing military right to repair and advocating for "data as a service."

• October 2025: NDAA, which includes the Warren-Sheehy provision, passed the U.S. Senate.^{[citation needed]}
• October 2025 - 339 small businesses sent a letter urging passage of military right to repair. "This is about ensuring the government can maintain and repair what it already owns. It's about making sure the Department of Defense has access to every capable partner in the country to keep our military mission-ready."
• October 2025 - Trump administration issues statements of administration policy on the House and Senate NDAA supporting military right to repair.
• October 2025 - Former Trump DoD undersecretary of defense for personnel and readiness, and VA Secretary Robert Wilkie endorse military right to repair.
• Now: The House and Senate versions of the FY26 NDAA go to conference.
• November 2025 - With Honor sends letter urging military right to repair be included in the final NDAA.
• November 2025 - taxpayer and watchdog groups send letter urging support for military right to repair in final NDAA.
• November 2025 - President and CEO of Aerospace Industries Association, Eric Fanning, publishes an op-ed in Washing Times opposing military right to repair.
• November 2025 - Secretary Hegseth announces new DoD acquisition policy including that "The Department must plan for and acquire systems with the ability to conduct organic depot-level maintenance, repair, and overhaul of systems and sub-systems to ensure military readiness for any conflict."^{[citation needed]}