As Congress prepares to return for its post-election lame duck session, the fiscal year 2027 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) is still unfinished. The House passed its version of the annual defense policy bill in July, but the Senate has yet to pass its own or consider amendments. While lawmakers are hoping to work out a final agreement before the end of the year, the election and concerns around the war in Iran will likely complicate final passage.
The NDAA sets defense policy and authorizes military spending, but it also regularly includes provisions that affect colleges and universities. This year's bill deals with issues ranging from foreign funding disclosures and international research partnerships to tuition assistance and educational opportunities for service members.
With negotiations approaching, ACE has coordinated a letter from higher education associations to congressional leaders asking them to support important education provisions and reject several proposals that could interrupt or ban international partnerships and research.
A major concern is the possible inclusion of the DETERRENT Act, which would greatly expand foreign gift and contract reporting requirements for colleges and universities. Adding that bill would expand reporting requirements under Section 117 of the Higher Education Act, which already requires institutions to disclose certain foreign gifts and contracts to the federal government. The bill would lower reporting thresholds, require institutions to collect information about faculty members' personal financial transactions—including gifts worth as little as $480—and place new restrictions on agreements with foreign entities.
ACE and other associations warn that these requirements could block important international partnerships, including exchange programs and international partnerships, and limit legitimate international research partnerships even if the work doesn't involve sensitive or federally funded research.
The higher education community supports strong research security protections and efforts to prevent foreign interference in U.S. research. But the groups argue that DETERRENT would duplicate existing federal requirements and give the Department of Education a larger, inappropriate role in overseeing research agreements, an area where the agency has limited expertise.
The associations also object to adding DETERRENT to the NDAA without further consideration by the congressional committees responsible for higher education policy. The Senate has not yet scheduled the legislation for a committee markup or floor vote.
The letter raises several other issues affecting military-connected students. The associations support increased tuition assistance for these students, along with protections against the secretary of defense abruptly ending an institution's eligibility to participate in military education programs. Those protections would also establish an appeals process and allow affected service members to finish their studies.
The groups also object to proposed research security restrictions that could effectively end many academic partnerships with institutions in China and other “countries of concern.” They want those provisions focused more closely on specific security threats, rather than broadly limiting legitimate academic exchanges and research collaborations.