Section 4 · Version 1.0 LOCKED
Ukraine, Israel, and Recognizable Examples
Critical non-additivity notice
Ukraine and Israel aid is already counted inside Section 3 where their ESF, FMF, global-health, and humanitarian dollars are part of the ForeignAssistance.gov aggregate. Their military portions also overlap Section 5. Therefore Section 4 contributes $0 net-new to cumulative Total A. This section is a decomposition and illustration of money already in the running total, not an addition to it.
Adding Section 4 figures to Section 3 would double-count. The section exists to explain recognizable cases and beneficiary-chain mechanics.
Key findings
Section 4 is illustrative. It adds nothing to the running total.
Ukraine: approved is not received. Congress appropriated approximately $174.2B across five supplementals; only approximately $83.4B had been disbursed by end-2024. An independent estimate puts value actually delivered near approximately $50.9B, reflecting undelivered funds, U.S.-industry replenishment capture, repayable loans, and GAO-corrected drawdown misvaluation.
Israel: cleaner and statutory. Israel receives approximately $3.8B per year under the 2016 MOU, consisting of $3.3B FMF and $0.5B missile defense, plus the FY2024 supplemental of $3.5B FMF and $5.2B missile defense / Iron Beam. Approximately 74% of FMF must be spent on U.S.-made arms, meaning about $2.44B per year is captured by U.S. industry while Israel receives the equipment.
Total B is below Total A. Ukraine Total B is reported as an open range, not a point.
Scope
This section uses Ukraine and Israel as illustrative recipients to show how gross resources directed, Total A, diverge from value reaching the recipient, Total B. It also demonstrates the Article 15 beneficiary-chain rule and the Section 3 to Section 5 netting rule.
Transparency gap
The principal transparency gap is that no single reconciled federal ledger line-items every Ukraine dollar by stage. Figures must be assembled across agencies using different definitions. The result is a set of stage-labeled figures rather than one clean ledger total.
Plain English Bottom Line
Ukraine and Israel are examples, not new totals. They show why an announced or appropriated amount is not the same as value received by a foreign recipient. Some money is not yet disbursed; some is captured by U.S. industry; some is replacement funding; and some lines are already counted in broader foreign-assistance or military-aid sections.