The DRIVE Act of 2025 amends 38 U.S.C. §111 to change how the VA sets its Beneficiary Travel mileage reimbursement. Instead of a fixed 41.5¢ per mile figure, the bill requires the VA’s mileage rate to be equal to or greater than the mileage reimbursement rate for federal employees prescribed by the Administrator of General Services under 5 U.S.C. §5707(b).
The bill also adds a processing requirement: when the Secretary exercises payment authority under the Beneficiary Travel program for a fiscal year, the VA must ensure that a properly submitted mileage allowance is paid within 90 days. Conforming edits remove the statutory reference to the old fixed rate and a superseded clause.
The change will automatically track GSA adjustments, with direct budget and operational implications for the VA and for veterans who travel for health care.
At a Glance
What It Does
The bill replaces the statutory 41.5¢ per‑mile figure in the Beneficiary Travel statute with a floor tied to the GSA privately‑owned vehicle mileage reimbursement rate (5 U.S.C. §5707(b)), and requires VA to pay properly submitted mileage claims within 90 days when it exercises payment authority for a fiscal year.
Who It Affects
Directly affects veterans who use VA health services and claim mileage under the Beneficiary Travel program, VA claims processors and regional offices that administer payments, and agency budget offices that must absorb or request funding for higher reimbursements tied to GSA adjustments.
Why It Matters
Linking the rate to GSA means the mileage rate will rise and fall with federal employee reimbursement policy rather than remain static, creating a recurring cost exposure for the VA but also reducing the risk that beneficiary payments lag market driving costs; the 90‑day payment requirement creates a measurable operational deadline for claims processing.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
The DRIVE Act repeals the fixed-per-mile language in the current Beneficiary Travel statute and replaces it with a binding benchmark: the VA’s mileage payment must be at least as high as the reimbursement rate the Administrator of General Services sets for use of privately owned vehicles when no government vehicle is available. Practically, that links veteran reimbursement to the same monthly or periodic adjustments that affect federal employee mileage, so veteran rates will move with the GSA schedule rather than remain frozen at a historical number.
The bill adds a timing obligation into the claims process. If, for a fiscal year, the Secretary elects to make Beneficiary Travel payments, the VA must take whatever steps are necessary to ensure mileage allowances are paid no later than 90 days after a properly submitted request.
The statute does not redefine what counts as a “properly submitted” request, so the VA will implement regulatory or procedural definitions to operationalize that timing requirement.The statutory changes are narrow in scope—they amend subsection (a) to remove the numeric rate and add a new subsection (g) establishing the GSA‑floor, and they insert a new paragraph in subsection (b) to create the 90‑day payment trigger. Conforming edits strike legacy language that referenced the old fixed rate and a now‑inapplicable clause.
Because the bill ties the VA rate to an external standard, it shifts future rate-setting from internal VA rulemaking to a mechanically indexed relationship with GSA’s published rate, while leaving appropriation and broader program eligibility decisions with Congress and the Secretary.Operationally, the VA will need to retool benefit tables, update payment systems to reflect the GSA rate changes, and define the administrative steps necessary to meet the 90‑day deadline. Budget offices should prepare for recurring increases when GSA raises its reimbursement; claims processing teams should expect tighter deadlines and potential workload spikes if GAO or veterans’ advocates press the VA on timely payments.
The Five Things You Need to Know
The bill removes the parenthetical “(at a rate of 41.5 cents per mile)” from 38 U.S.C. §111(a) and replaces it with a rate “determined in accordance with subsection (g).”, New subsection (g) requires the Secretary to ensure the VA’s mileage rate is equal to or greater than the GSA privately‑owned vehicle reimbursement rate set under 5 U.S.C. §5707(b).
The bill adds a paragraph to 38 U.S.C. §111(b) obliging the VA to pay a mileage allowance no later than 90 days after a properly submitted request, but only when the Secretary “exercises the authority under this section to make any payments” in that fiscal year. , Conforming edits in section 2(c) remove a now‑obsolete statutory reference and strike language that previously limited the application of subsection (g), cleaning up cross‑references that would conflict with the new GSA‑linked standard.
The change creates an automatic indexing mechanism: future GSA adjustments (annual or interim) will alter VA beneficiary mileage without additional statutory action, making the benefit responsive to broader federal mileage policy rather than fixed statutory text.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Short title
Provides the Act’s names: the “Driver Reimbursement Increase for Veteran Equity Act of 2025” and the “DRIVE Act of 2025.” This is a housekeeping provision that does not affect substance but establishes the bill’s citation for regulatory and budgetary references.
Remove fixed 41.5¢ and reference new rate rule
Strikes the statutory numeric rate and substitutes language pointing to the new mechanism in subsection (g). For implementers, this is the operative swap: the law will no longer anchor reimbursement to an outdated cent amount. Practically, payroll and travel‑payment tables will require updates so that disbursements reflect the new calculation method tied to the GSA metric.
90‑day payment deadline for properly submitted mileage claims
Adds a conditional duty: when the Secretary exercises payment authority under the section for any fiscal year, the VA must ensure mileage allowances are paid within 90 days of a properly submitted request. The condition introduces a statutory performance standard but leaves room for agency rulemaking to define ‘properly submitted’ and the steps necessary to meet the deadline, implicating claims‑processing workflows and case management systems.
Clean up cross‑references and striking obsolete clauses
Makes two technical edits: removes the old 41.5¢ parenthetical from subsection (a) and strikes a phrase in subsection (b)(1) that referenced a now-irrelevant subsection (g)(2). These changes prevent contradictory text and reduce ambiguity in statutory cross‑references that could impede implementation.
This bill is one of many.
Codify tracks hundreds of bills on Veterans across all five countries.
Explore Veterans in Codify Search →Who Benefits and Who Bears the Cost
Every bill creates winners and losers. Here's who stands to gain and who bears the cost.
Who Benefits
- Veterans who travel for VA health care, especially rural and low‑income veterans — they receive mileage compensation that will rise with the federal employee GSA rate, reducing out‑of‑pocket driving costs when GSA increases drive costs upward.
- Volunteer and paid drivers who transport veterans (including caregivers and community transportation providers) — their reimbursement will align with federal employee rates, improving compensation predictability and potentially increasing willingness to provide transport.
- Veterans Service Organizations and advocates — the GSA link reduces the need for recurring legislative fixes to address freezes in reimbursement, giving advocates a clear benchmark to demand parity with federal employee policy.
Who Bears the Cost
- Department of Veterans Affairs (appropriations and program offices) — linking to the GSA rate creates recurring cost exposure that VA must absorb or seek appropriations for, and it imposes administrative costs to update payment systems and meet the 90‑day deadline.
- Congressional appropriations committees and taxpayers — higher, indexed mileage payments increase the baseline budget pressure for beneficiary travel, potentially requiring tradeoffs in VA funding or additional appropriations.
- Regional VA claims processors and IT systems — meeting a 90‑day statutory deadline may require staff increases, new claims‑tracking workflows, and IT modifications to calculate GSA‑sourced rates and process payments in the defined window.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
The central tension is between equitable, market‑responsive reimbursement for veterans—which argues for indexing mileage to the GSA rate to reflect real driving costs—and fiscal and operational control, which argues for a static or narrowly tailored rate to preserve predictable VA budgets and manageable claims processes; the bill chooses market responsiveness but leaves the VA and Congress to manage the resulting budgetary and administrative strain.
Two implementation ambiguities are likely to matter. First, the 90‑day payment requirement is conditional: it applies “if the Secretary exercises the authority under this section to make any payments” in a fiscal year.
That phrasing raises operational questions about partial or phased payment programs, advances, or cases where the Secretary constrains payments for budgetary reasons; the VA will need to decide whether any limitation of payment authority could be used to avoid the timing requirement. Second, the statute does not define what constitutes a “properly submitted” request, so administration will depend on VA regulation or internal guidance—creating a potential dispute vector where claimants and advocates argue about what documentation the VA may require within the statutory timeframe.
Budgetary and policy trade‑offs are real. Tying beneficiary mileage to GSA standardizes veteran reimbursement with federal employee policy, but it also removes a point where Congress or VA could calibrate the benefit independently.
Since GSA rates can be adjusted for fiscal pressure, fuel price swings, or administration policy, the VA faces recurring volatility in benefit cost forecasting. Practically, VA program offices must reconcile the new entitlement floor with existing travel‑support programs and may need supplemental appropriations during periods of rapid rate increases.
Finally, the bill’s mechanical linkage could create mismatch in local contexts (for example, long rural trips, volunteer‑driver models, or state programs that top up federal reimbursement) that the statute does not address explicitly.
Try it yourself.
Ask a question in plain English, or pick a topic below. Results in seconds.