Defense contractors are successfully lobbying to gut military right-to-repair provisions in the 2026 National Defense Authorization Act, sources tell WIRED. Instead of empowering servicemembers to fix their own equipment, lawmakers are likely to replace those provisions with a subscription-based "data-as-a-service" model that would force the military to pay contractors for repair information they already own.
The military industrial complex just scored a major victory over taxpayers and national security readiness. Right-to-repair provisions that would have empowered US servicemembers to fix their own equipment are being quietly stripped from the 2026 National Defense Authorization Act, replaced instead with a subscription model that forces the military to rent repair access from the same contractors who built the equipment.
Sources familiar with ongoing NDAA negotiations tell WIRED that provisions enabling servicemembers to repair drones, fighter jets, and even basic equipment like Navy vessel stoves will likely be removed entirely from the final bill language expected next week. The replacement? A "data-as-a-service" subscription plan that essentially makes the military pay twice - once for the equipment, then again for the right to fix it.
The original provisions had rare bipartisan backing. Senator Elizabeth Warren's Section 836 in the Senate version drew from her Warrior Right to Repair Act, requiring contractors to provide the Department of Defense with "the rights to diagnose, maintain, and repair the covered defense equipment." Republican Representative Mike Rogers, chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, introduced similar language in Section 863.
But defense lobbying groups mobilized hard against losing their repair monopoly. The National Defense Industrial Association released a white paper in September arguing that forcing contractors to share repair information would "limit innovation" by exposing intellectual property. Eric Fanning, CEO of the Aerospace Industries Association, claimed letting servicemembers fix their own equipment could "threaten the backbone of US defense."
"Our real concern is that the proposed legislative language amounts to an eminent domain push by the federal government," Margaret Boatner, AIA's vice president of national security policy, told WIRED. "It requires defense contractors to disclose a substantial amount of proprietary IP just to compete for contracts."
The lobbying appears to have worked. "The House Armed Services Committee chair [Rogers] and ranking member [Smith] are sympathetic and pushing to replace the right to repair provision with this idea of data as a service, which is basically renting the military what they already sold them," a person with knowledge of the conference negotiations told WIRED.
This represents a stunning reversal of stated Trump administration policy. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has pushed for military right-to-repair provisions in all Army contracts. Navy Secretary John Phelan has spoken in congressional hearings about repair independence. Army Secretary Dan Driscoll has said the defense industry has "conned the US military" into buying expensive equipment with repair restrictions.
"If right to repair is replaced by data-as-a-service, it will be a direct undermining of policy outlined by the Trump White House," another person familiar with NDAA negotiations told WIRED.
The financial incentives are clear. OpenSecrets data shows both Smith and Rogers have received hundreds of thousands of dollars from defense companies. The potential switch to subscription-based repair data represents what right-to-repair advocate Louis Rossmann calls the military equivalent of BMW's controversial subscription heated seats.
The stakes extend beyond military readiness. Nathan Proctor, senior director of the Public Interest Research Group's right-to-repair campaign, notes that once the military owns equipment, "there is no competition at all if the manufacturer can make the repairs a proprietary process." That lack of competition means higher costs for taxpayers.
Rossmann points to historical precedent: "Most of the innovation that occurred in the technological sector for over 40 years occurred in the military back when repair was standard." Restricting military repair access could hamper the innovation pipeline that has historically driven civilian tech advances.
The timing is particularly problematic given current global tensions. When a drone fails in an active combat zone, servicemembers currently need to call manufacturer-approved repair technicians rather than fixing equipment themselves. Warren's original provision would have eliminated this bottleneck, potentially saving lives and mission success.
The final NDAA language is expected by next week, after which both houses of Congress must vote before sending the bill to President Trump's desk. The reversal would represent a rare instance where defense contractors successfully overruled both military leadership and the administration's stated policy preferences.
The potential elimination of military right-to-repair provisions represents more than just a policy setback - it's a blueprint for how defense contractors can override both military leadership and administration priorities through targeted lobbying. As the final NDAA language emerges next week, the question becomes whether Trump will sign legislation that directly contradicts his own defense officials' stated needs. For taxpayers and service members, the message is clear: even when you buy military equipment, you don't really own it.
