Defense contractors that pay dividends or repurchase their own shares could lose access to Pentagon contracts unless they win a waiver, and two of Washington’s most powerful lobbies are now fighting over whether that rule survives the final defense bill. Leading labor unions urged the House and Senate Armed Services Committees to "oppose attempts to strip" the stock-buyback provision from the Senate’s fiscal 2027 National Defense Authorization Act, according to Federal News Network.

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce sent the same committees the opposite message on Oct. 6. Its letter identifies the language as Section 815 of S. 4784, the Senate bill, and asks Congress to drop it. The House version contains no comparable restriction, so the provision’s fate now rests with the conference negotiators reconciling the two bills.

What the Senate Buyback Language Would Require of Pentagon Suppliers

The Senate Armed Services Committee adopted two related buyback measures during its markup in June. One would prohibit the Pentagon from contracting with companies "unless the contractor agrees to not purchase equity security, pay dividends, or make any other capital distribution with respect to equity securities unless the contractor has a waiver from the defense secretary," Federal News Network reported on June 15.

A second amendment, passed with bipartisan support, would require contractors to submit a "qualified defense investment plan" detailing how they will increase production capacity or face restrictions on shareholder distributions. That measure draws partly on the Prioritizing the Warfighter in Defense Contracting Act from Sens. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) and Mike Lee (R-Utah).

Federal News Network describes the Senate committee’s provision as codifying Executive Order 14372, "Prioritizing the Warfighter in Defense Contracting," which President Donald Trump signed on Jan. 7, 2026. In an Aug. 10 letter to Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, Warren and Lee described the order as one that "restricts these companies’ stock buybacks and distributions if they are not meeting the Department of Defense’s (DoD) performance needs."

Why Unions Are Tying Buybacks to 2 Million Lost Jobs

The unions framed the fight around the defense workforce. Their letter argues that while "the industry’s center of gravity progressively shifted to investor returns, workers have paid an enormous price." Employment at defense contractors fell from 3.2 million to 1.1 million workers over the last several decades, the unions said, and inflation-adjusted average salaries declined over the same period.

"Due to prolific subcontracting and union busting, unionization in the sector has dramatically decreased, with an estimated 10% to 14% of the defense sector unionized," the unions wrote. They pointed to labor disputes and work stoppages in the past two years at Boeing, Lockheed Martin, General Dynamics, Textron, GE Aerospace and Pratt & Whitney, and urged "strict guardrails" on the industrial base.

Did the Executive Order Already Cut Buybacks 36%?

Warren and Lee have supplied the provision’s backers with their main data point. Their staff reviewed financial filings from the top 20 publicly traded defense contractors and, by the senators’ account, found that the four largest firms that paid buybacks and dividends in early 2025 cut that spending sharply after the executive order took effect.

According to the senators’ letter, Lockheed Martin, RTX, Northrop Grumman and General Dynamics spent $4.2 billion on buybacks and dividends in the first quarter of 2025 and $2.7 billion in the first quarter of 2026, "a roughly 36 percent drop." The letter’s own appendix gives somewhat different company figures: summing them yields about $4.16 billion and $2.75 billion, a drop closer to 34 percent, and RTX’s payouts rose slightly rather than fell. Boeing, the other top-five contractor, did neither in either quarter, and its capital spending rose. The appendix also shows Northrop Grumman’s capital expenditures falling over the period.

Across all 20 contractors, the staff review counted a $2.0 billion cut in buybacks and dividends and a $1.2 billion increase in capital expenditures, comparing the first quarter of 2026 with the first quarter of 2025. The letter says 12 of the 20 reduced their shareholder payouts. It also flags contractors that went the other way: GE Aerospace spent $2.3 billion on buybacks in the first quarter of 2026, up 21 percent from $1.9 billion a year earlier, according to the letter.

The senators used those figures to argue for legislation, not just continued enforcement of the order. The review, they wrote, shows "the Pentagon should continue this progress by supporting efforts to cement these reforms in law."

The Chamber’s Case: A ‘Chilling Signal’ to New Entrants

Industry groups counter that the restriction would drive capital away from the very sector Congress wants to grow. The Chamber’s letter, signed by Executive Vice President and Chief Policy Officer Neil Bradley, says Section 815 "would send a chilling signal by broadly restricting stock buybacks and dividends for any company with a procurement contract at the Department of War."

"Buyback restrictions signal that entering the DIB comes with punitive strings attached, discouraging the private sector engagement policymakers seek," the Chamber wrote. It added that because buybacks come from surplus capital after research and development and investment commitments are met, "this provision could force companies to leave the DIB entirely to meet their fiduciary obligations."

The Aerospace Industries Association raised the same objection in June, after Rep. Chris Deluzio (D-Pa.) offered a buyback ban in the House Armed Services Committee. Deluzio withdrew that amendment over jurisdictional issues. "Put simply, limiting capital returns would weaken, not strengthen, America’s industrial capacity," the association said.

What It Means for Contractors

Publicly traded primes and their larger subcontractors face the most direct exposure. As described in the Senate committee’s language, the provision would make an agreement not to buy back stock or pay dividends a condition of contracting, with a waiver from the defense secretary as the main exit.

The investment-plan amendment adds a separate compliance track. Contractors would have to document how they plan to increase production capacity, and the restrictions on shareholder distributions would apply to those that do not.

Several points remain unsettled. The House bill contains no buyback language, and Federal News Network describes the provision’s fate as unclear. Section 815’s final text, any dollar or contract-size thresholds, and how waivers would be granted all depend on what emerges from conference. The executive order is a separate instrument from the bill, so contractors already subject to its performance reviews should plan for continued scrutiny of buybacks and dividends, with or without a statute.

Finance and contracts teams at public defense companies should track conference action on S. 4784 and model how a distribution restriction or waiver process would affect planned dividends and repurchases.

Sources