A $20 billion battleship discarded by the U.S. after WWII returns in Trump’s $1.5 trillion defense budget, with experts warning modern missiles could destroy it easily

(SeaPRwire) –   Last month, President Donald Trump unveiled a record-breaking $1.5 trillion defense budget for the 2027 fiscal year. However, analysts suggest this massive proposal contains clear indicators of fiscal waste and excessive spending.

A recent report from the Cato Institute highlighted several weapon systems in the upcoming budget request that the think tank characterizes as ineffective and unnecessary. Among these is a battleship announced by the president in December, which he named after himself. The Cato Institute views this “Trump-class” vessel as utilizing technology so outdated that it predates the statehood of Alaska and Hawaii.

The core issue is that the U.S. Navy has not operated a battleship since the retirement of the final Iowa-class ship in 1992, a design that has not been produced since the mid-20th century. The Trump-class battleship, for which the Department of Defense is seeking over $1 billion in initial funding, would be inherently rooted in WWII-era design and vulnerable to contemporary weaponry. Although the initial price tag is in the billions, Cato estimates the actual cost at $20 billion per ship, noting that it would remain incapable of defending against advanced, modern anti-ship missiles.

“We haven’t utilized this since World War II,” Ben Giltner, a policy analyst at the Cato Institute, explained, “because aircraft were able to neutralize it at sea.”

Giltner argued that this vessel has no place on the Defense Department’s procurement list, noting that it lacks the capabilities of an aircraft carrier and cannot transport jets or supplies. Due to its incompatibility with modern military technology, the proposed Trump-class ship would offer no utility in current or future combat scenarios.

Why experts say Trump’s battleship is a waste of money

This defense request would further inflate a $39 trillion national debt, which recently exceeded 100% of GDP for the first time since the Second World War. While defense spending as a percentage of GDP remains well below its mid-20th-century peak, Cato projects that the U.S. must either reduce spending or increase taxes by $827 billion annually to prevent the debt-to-GDP ratio from doubling by 2054—a sum comparable to entire historical defense budgets. The $1.5 trillion proposal represents a 44% increase over the previous year’s request. While full congressional approval is unlikely, the request illustrates the Trump administration’s strategic defense priorities.

Giltner noted that Cato’s $20 billion estimate per battleship is conservative, covering only acquisition and procurement. He pointed out that this figure excludes long-term operational costs, such as standard maintenance and specialized crew training.

Instead of increasing the debt, Giltner suggested that tax dollars would be better spent on debt reduction. “We could be doing something as straightforward as paying down the debt, or the interest on the debt, which is currently massive,” he said.

It’s $49 billion to weapons with ‘a lot of flaws’

Trump has stated that the Navy intends to field between 20 and 25 battleships, with the construction of the lead ship, the U.S.S. Defiant, slated to begin in the early 2030s.

During the announcement of the new class in December, Navy Secretary John Phelan claimed the Navy “desperately needs” these ships. “The future Trump-class battleship, the U.S.S. Defiant, will be the largest, deadliest, most versatile, and most impressive warship on the world’s oceans,” he stated.

Following the April budget announcement, JPMorgan noted that the proposal indicates a significant shift in Washington’s approach to military investment.

“A global security landscape that relies less on international norms and more on raw force continues to drive defense spending upward; simultaneously, the Trump administration is attempting to restructure the U.S. defense industrial base, leading to increased capital inflow into the sector,” JPMorgan stated in a report.

Beyond the battleship, the Cato Institute report identified four other weapon systems as wasteful: the F-35; the LGM-35A Sentinel intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM), an upgrade to the current U.S. ICBM fleet estimated at $4.6 billion; the $5 billion F-47 stealth aircraft; and the “Golden Dome” missile defense shield, which could cost up to $1.1 trillion. Combined with the battleship, these systems would require nearly $49 billion in funding for 2027 alone.

“As I’ve noted, these weapon systems have numerous flaws,” Giltner said. “The real question is, why are we allocating so much money to these specific systems in the first place?”