Robin Hood Foundation Pick-A-Ticker Stock Investing Contest 2025-26
Golden Dome: The Astronomical Cost of Defeating ‘Any Foreign Aerial Attack’
Building Trump’s proposed missile and air defense system would be an enormous task — and the president’s spending target is likely just a fraction of the final price.
BusinessweekThe Big Take
Just days into his second administration, President Donald Trump signed an executive order attempting to do what no other commander in chief has done: build a system for the US to “deter—and defend its citizens and critical infrastructure against—any foreign aerial attack on the Homeland.”
The threats that the so-called Golden Dome is meant to defeat sit mainly in the arsenals of Russia, China and North Korea, which together have hundreds of nuclear missiles and thousands of other weapons that could be used to wage war on the US.
The US has historically relied on a policy of nuclear deterrence, and a limited system of ground-based missile interceptors in Alaska and California, to fend off such an attack. But Trump’s Golden Dome would go much further.
The initiative is intended to create layers of defense systems from the ground to space that will stop incoming missiles launched from anywhere in the world. It would uniquely rely on a system of space-based interceptor satellites that track and destroy missiles in orbit as they hurtle toward a destination on Earth—technology that doesn’t yet exist.
Even if Golden Dome does become operational, there’s no guarantee the system will be 100% effective. What it will look like, who will make it and how much it will cost have still not been made public.
The Missile Defense Agency, part of the US Department of Defense, announced on Dec. 2 that it had selected about a thousand companies, including Viasat, Rocket Lab and Deloitte, to move forward with proposals that could support Golden Dome. All are eligible to receive funding from a pool of $151 billion that has not yet been allocated.
Trump has said the project will cost about $175 billion and be completed by the end of his term in 2029, but defense experts say those targets are unrealistic. A Bloomberg analysis found the final price tag could reach many multiples of that; a constellation of space-based interceptors alone would cost $161 billion to $542 billion, according to a May report from the Congressional Budget Office. In late November the US Space Force awarded several contracts, each of which was for less than $9 million, to undisclosed companies to develop interceptor technology.
Bloomberg calculated the cost of a system that would comply with the executive order’s directive of protecting the US against an all-out aerial attack—a worst-case scenario using the combined arsenals of China, Russia and North Korea.
ATTACK ASSUMPTIONS
Threat
Intercontinental ballistic missiles
Other ballistic missiles
Boosted hypersonic weapons
Cruise missiles
Drones
Quantity
700
510
800
1,500
10,000
Note: Based on worst-case scenario. Read methodology section for full breakdown.
SPACE-BASED DEFENSE
The space-based layer of defense, specifically outlined as a requirement of Golden Dome in the executive order, is the most technologically complex and likely the most expensive element of the project.
The technology for a constellation of space-based interceptors doesn’t yet exist. To build this layer, the US would have to design thousands of interceptors, manufacture them and place them in orbit—tasks that would cost many billions of dollars and would be difficult to complete in just a few years, according to defense experts.
Full coverage cost estimate
$
Intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM)
A long-range missile that can travel from one side of the planet to the other in roughly 30 minutes and often carries nuclear warheads. The space-based layer is intended to track and intercept these threats.
Interceptor satellites
The system would require hundreds or even thousands of orbiting satellites, each armed with interceptors, to effectively target a missile regardless of when or where it launches.
Space-based interceptors
Space-based interceptors could also target a missile in the five or so minutes after launch while it is still in the atmosphere, known as the missile’s boost phase.
Exoatmospheric Kill Vehicle (EKV)
The EKV, equipped with its own sensors to guide it to a target, uses the force of impact to destroy a ballistic missile once released from a booster rocket.
Ground-Based Interceptor (GBI)
The EKVs are carried into space by a GBI that launches from the ground. The US has 44 of these interceptors positioned in Alaska and California, and the Pentagon plans to add 20 more starting around 2028. Those numbers would be insufficient to handle a full-scale attack from either Russia or China.
ICBM
Space-based sensor satellites
A constellation of space-based sensors would track missiles in space and provide a bird’s eye view of threats closer to the Earth’s surface, such as cruise missiles, aircraft and even ships.
The Space Force is already working with companies to develop a layer of next-generation satellites to track incoming missiles from space, but more of these may be needed to create a robust surveillance system for Golden Dome.
Overhead Persistent Infrared Satellites (OPIR)
This constellation of satellites is designed to detect plumes of hot gases from missile launches on Earth, sending the first warning signs to the US military of a potential threat.
OPIR Polar
Northrop Grumman is developing satellites to watch the northern polar region — the shortest route for a long-range ballistic missile to travel toward the US from adversaries on the other side of the world.
Air missile tracking constellation
A separate constellation would track the course of threats flying within the atmosphere, such as hypersonic glide vehicles, aeroballistic missiles and cruise missiles.
OPIR Geosynchronous
Lockheed Martin Corp. is developing satellites to track missile launches from geostationary orbit—about 22,000 miles above the Earth’s surface.
EARTH
UPPER ATMOSPHERE
To counter threats within the atmosphere, like foreign aircraft or cruise missiles, the next layer of Golden Dome would most likely include traditional air defense systems. One way to continuously monitor US skies during an attack would be flying squadrons of fighter jets to detect incoming threats with built-in radars and intercept them with missiles.
E-2D Hawkeye
A Northrop Grumman-made aircraft that provides 360-degree radar coverage from the air.
KC-135 refueling tankers
To continually monitor the skies, US military aircraft would need to refuel without landing. Airborne refueling tankers can keep jets flying for uninterrupted surveillance.
Fighter jets
The F-15 is a combat aircraft, originally designed to intercept fighters and bombers, that could be used to shoot down missiles and drones.
AIM-9X missiles
Golden Dome would also most likely include ground-based interceptor systems like Patriot and THAAD batteries, which can engage missiles that get through the space-based layer. Patriot and THAAD can also intercept aircraft, cruise missiles and drones.
Hypersonic glide vehicle
ICBM
Patriot interceptor and battery
A portable, ground-based system designed to intercept and destroy aircraft, cruise missiles, and shorter-range ballistic missiles.
SM-3 Block IIA missile and Aegis Ashore
A ground-based system that tracks and shoots down intermediate-range ballistic missiles, primarily using SM-3 Block IIA interceptor missiles.
THAAD interceptor and battery
A system that includes its own radar and truck-mounted launchers that fire interceptors capable of destroying short- to medium-range ballistic missiles.
AN/TPY-2
A radar component specializing in high-altitude threat detection that can be used with THAAD and other air defense systems.
LOWER ATMOSPHERE
The final layer of Golden Dome, according to experts, would target lower-flying threats, primarily drones. At this point, ballistic missiles, cruise missiles and other higher-altitude threats should have been destroyed in space or higher in the atmosphere.
Drones are cheap and easy to manufacture, making them attractive to both nations and non-state actors. Protecting the US from a drone attack would require a number of ground-based systems to cheaply and effectively destroy dozens of these units at a time.
Lancet drone
A low-cost Russian-made drone that can conduct surveillance and attack targets such as critical infrastructure and military equipment.
Geran drone
A Russian variant of an Iranian drone used in one-way attacks, which often strikes targets in swarms. Russia has frequently used these small cruise missiles in its war against Ukraine.
Quadcopter drone
These types of drones, used by the Chinese military, can hover over targets to conduct reconnaissance and precise strikes.
IFPC Increment 2
The Indirect Fire Protection Capability Increment 2 is a mobile rocket launcher that can intercept short- and mid-range threats, including drones, cruise missiles, and rockets.
IFPC HEL
The US Army’s Indirect Fire Protection Capability High Energy Laser (IFPC HEL) uses a high-powered laser to zap lower-altitude threats, like drones and rocket artillery.
IFPC HPM
The Integrated Fires Protection Capability High-Power Microwave (IFPC HPM) uses focused microwave beams to disable swarms of drones.
IFPC system
M-LIDS
The Mobile Low, Slow, Small Unmanned Aircraft Integrated Defeat System destroys drones using electronic warfare to jam them or even take control.
DE M-SHORAD
The Directed Energy Maneuver-Short Range Air Defense system consists of a vehicle with a powerful laser mounted on top that can shoot down drones, helicopters and other low-flying aircraft.
MADIS
The Marine Air Defense Integrated System is a short-range defense unit that uses electronic warfare, cannons and missiles to shoot down low-altitude threats like drones. The system is mounted on a vehicle with its own radar and control center.
Sources: Department of Defense; Build Your Own Golden Dome: A Framework for Understanding Costs, Choices, and Tradeoffs, Todd Harrison, American Enterprise Institute; Center for Strategic and International Studies; US Congress; Center for New American Security; RTX Corp.; Lockheed Martin Corp.; Congressional Research Service; Defense Technical Information Center; US General Services Administration; InsideDefense; Nuclear Matters Handbook; Arms Control Association; Northrop Grumman; US Institute of Peace; Department of Defense’s Director of Operational Test and Evaluation; Missile Defense Advocacy Alliance; ArmyTechnology; Unmanned Airspace
Note: Illustrations are not to scale
The cost of a Golden Dome system that effectively protects the US from such an all-out aerial attack, according to Bloomberg’s estimate, would end up around $1.1 trillion, more than 500% higher than Trump’s estimate of $175 billion.
That would most likely be a hard sell for both Democrats and Republican fiscal hawks in Congress, though lawmakers allocated nearly $25 billion for Golden Dome in Trump’s One Big Beautiful Bill Act this summer.
How the Costs Stack Up
Bloomberg’s price estimates for a potential Golden Dome are at least four times higher than what Trump has said the project will cost.
Source: Trump White House May 20 briefing
“I think that a future administration, a future Congress, would have a hard time looking at all the expenses and the totality of the things that have been thrown out there and saying, ‘This is a good idea,’” says Dave Vorland, who served as the acting deputy assistant secretary of space and missile defense policy in the Biden administration.
The White House declined to comment on the record.
The Missile Defense Agency and Space Force referred questions to the Department of Defense. A Pentagon official said that the baseline architecture for Golden Dome has been established and that the implementation plan is undergoing review. The official added: “As a matter of policy, we do not provide details relating to specifics of architectural discussion or pre-decisional matters. Recognizing adversaries’ intent to exploit Golden Dome’s breakthroughs, we are rigorously protecting its strategic advantages from external access.”
Bloomberg’s estimate is based on the prices of weapons and defense systems, but it doesn’t account for operating costs, personnel or the research and development of new technology like space-based interceptors, factors that would drive the total price tag higher.
A Golden Dome that provides only limited protection could be built more cheaply. Bloomberg also calculated the price of a more modest missile defense shield designed to protect against an all-out attack from just one adversary, Russia, and found that even this version would cost $844.4 billion.
Critics, including some experts and lawmakers, also say that if the US rapidly expands its missile defenses, it could fuel an arms race that spurs Russia and China to accelerate nuclear weapons development, dimming prospects of negotiations to reduce their arsenals. This, in turn, could stimulate even more defense investment from the US as it races to maintain a strategic advantage over its adversaries, potentially driving up spending on homeland security for years to come.
The concept of a protective shield around the US is not new. Both the Reagan and George H.W. Bush administrations had plans for less-ambitious missile defenses before ultimately abandoning those efforts because of cost constraints, feasibility concerns and waning congressional support.
Trump’s vision for Golden Dome is conceptually based on Israel’s Iron Dome, a system that has successfully countered thousands of short-range missiles since it entered service almost 15 years ago. That system, at the low end of a larger Israeli integrated air and missile defense network, was built by Israeli defense company Rafael Advanced Defense Systems Ltd. and US company Raytheon, a subsidiary of RTX Corp.
Every component for Golden Dome will be made in the US, Trump has said, and Silicon Valley companies will play an important role alongside established defense giants.
“What’s exciting about this is it makes it available to everybody to participate, to compete. Big companies, midsize companies, small companies,” Senator Kevin Cramer, a Republican from North Dakota, said in May at a Golden Dome press briefing in the Oval Office.
SpaceX, Palantir Technologies Inc. and other large contractors like Lockheed Martin Corp. are likely to be involved given their close relationship with the government and defense experience. A crowd of defense startups like Varda Space Industries Inc. and Apex have also been positioning themselves for the opportunity to contribute. Varda was among the firms selected by the Missile Defense Agency to move forward with their plans.
SpaceX and Palantir didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment.
Robert Lightfoot, president of Lockheed Martin Space, said in a statement that the company “is ready to move with the speed America needs to field a scalable, integrated missile defense capability.”
Ian Cinnamon, CEO of Apex, said the startup is “laying the foundation for Golden Dome” by showing how industry “can accelerate the deployment of critical, next generation space architectures.” Dave McFarland, Varda’s vice president for hypersonic and reentry test, said in a statement the company is “happy to be able to support national security priorities by offering our reentry vehicles for tracking test and targeting.”
Trump has also mentioned that Canada may be included in the project but would have to pay $61 billion to join, around 5% of what the price tag could be, according to Bloomberg’s estimate. It’s not clear whether the overall cost would be higher to cover Canada.
Since the executive order was signed about 11 months ago, few details have emerged about the specific architecture of Golden Dome, leaving the defense industry, lawmakers and Pentagon officials anxious for answers.
The administration’s timeline of finishing the project before Trump leaves office in January 2029 “was unrealistic from the beginning,” says Todd Harrison, a senior defense fellow at the American Enterprise Institute.
“The name, the concept, the program of Golden Dome probably does not survive after this administration,” he says.
