HB7178, the U.S.-Israel Anti-Killer Drone Act of 2026, would amend the National Defense Authorization Act for FY2020 to deepen cooperation with Israel on unmanned systems and the threats they pose. It seeks to accelerate joint research, development, and fielding of counter-UAS capabilities across warfighting domains.
Key mechanisms include boosting funding to support cooperative activities, requiring annual reporting to Congress, and designating the existing United States-Israel Operations-Technology Working Group as the central hub for coordination.
At a Glance
What It Does
The bill expands U.S.-Israel cooperation on counter unmanned systems, increases funding to support joint efforts, requires annual congressional reporting, and designates a central coordinating group to push deployment of relevant systems.
Who It Affects
Directly affects the Department of Defense and Israeli military services, U.S. and Israeli acquisition program offices, and defense contractors involved in unmanned systems and counter-UAS technologies.
Why It Matters
By elevating interoperability and oversight, the bill aims to deter Iran-origin unmanned threats and accelerate fielding of capable countermeasures through a unified, cross-border program.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
The act is written to tighten and accelerate how the United States and Israel cooperate on unmanned systems used in combat and deterrence. It starts by formalizing the long-standing partnership as the U.S.-Israel Anti-Killer Drone Act of 2026 and then layers in concrete mechanisms to move faster on counter-UAS development.
A centerpiece is an increase in funding dedicated to joint U.S.-Israel counter-UAS efforts—from a lower baseline up to $100 million annually—to support research, development, testing, and fielding of capabilities. The bill also requires annual reporting to Congress describing what activities were conducted, progress made, how those activities align with other U.S. programs, and recommendations for future work.
It codifies a formal governance role for the United States-Israel Operations-Technology Working Group as the hub for coordinating these activities and ensuring information sharing, joint exercises, and rapid deployment when needed.The statutory definition of “unmanned system” is clarified using the existing framework in 14 U.S.C. §319, ensuring consistent interpretation across the program. Taken together, these provisions push toward a more integrated, interoperable posture with Israel to counter threats from Iran-origin unmanned capabilities and related proxies.
The Five Things You Need to Know
The bill increases annual funding for US-Israel counter-UAS activities to $100 million.
The act requires annual, detailed reports to Congress on activities, progress, harmonization, and threat assessment.
It designates the US-Israel Operations-Technology Working Group as the central coordinating hub.
It expands joint training, information-sharing, and alignment with U.S. acquisition programs.
It defines unmanned system per 14 U.S.C. §319 for consistency across the program.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Short title
This section designates the act as the U.S.-Israel Anti-Killer Drone Act of 2026. It is a formal naming provision that does not authorize new capabilities beyond the programmatic direction established elsewhere in the bill.
Findings on unmanned threats
Section 2(a) lays out the findings that Iran-origin unmanned systems pose ongoing intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance, and strike threats to U.S. forces and regional partners. The findings catalog examples of past operations and demonstrate the rationale for intensified U.S.-Israel collaboration on counter-UAS capabilities and related technologies.
Sense of Congress regarding cooperation
Section 2(b) expresses Congressional intent to strengthen research, development, and fielding of mutual counter-UAS technologies. It emphasizes information sharing, joint training, and close coordination with acquisition programs to speed deployment of effective capabilities and to harmonize U.S. and Israeli efforts.
Annual funding and reporting changes
Section 2(c) amends NDAA 2020 to raise the annual authorization for this program to $100 million. It also creates an annual reporting requirement to Congress detailing the activities conducted, progress achieved, program harmonization, transition of capabilities to acquisition managers, and recommendations for future work, including threat assessments specific to Iran-origin unmanned systems.
Unmanned system defined
Section 2(d) provides the definition of “unmanned system” by cross-referencing the term as defined in 14 U.S.C. §319, ensuring a consistent scope for the program across both countries and all related activities.
This bill is one of many.
Codify tracks hundreds of bills on Defense across all five countries.
Explore Defense 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
- Department of Defense and Israeli military services: gain clearer, faster pathways to co-develop and deploy counter-UAS technologies and interoperability with partners.
- U.S. and Israeli acquisition program offices: benefit from streamlined coordination and a defined framework for rapid fielding of counter-UAS capabilities.
- Congress and oversight committees: gain visibility through annual reporting and status assessments to inform budget and policy decisions.
- Defense contractors specializing in unmanned systems and counter-UAS technologies: obtain clearer collaboration channels and potential contracting opportunities.
- Regional security partners and allied users of U.S.-Israel counter-UAS capabilities: receive more reliable deterrence and interoperability through integrated technologies.
Who Bears the Cost
- U.S. taxpayers and the Department of Defense: cover the increased annual funding level for counter-UAS efforts.
- Israeli partner organizations and contractors: incur costs associated with joint activities, exercises, and implementation of interoperability programs.
- U.S. and Israeli agencies administering the annual reporting framework: allocate resources to compile, review, and present the required information to Congress.
- Industry participants expanding R&D, testing, and compliance activities: bear costs to meet program requirements and timelines.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
The central dilemma is whether to accelerate joint U.S.-Israel counter-UAS efforts and expand funding to deter Iran-origin threats, while maintaining rigorous oversight, safeguarding sensitive technologies, and ensuring the program remains interoperable with broader U.S. defense priorities.
The bill’s increased funding and enhanced information-sharing create opportunities for rapid advancement in counter-UAS capabilities, but they also raise questions about control, oversight, and the distribution of costs across the DoD and partner industries. Expanding joint activities with a key ally necessitates careful management of sensitive technologies and export controls, and the annual reporting requirement—while increasing transparency—adds administrative overhead.
The success of the program hinges on effective harmonization with existing U.S. programs and avoiding duplication of effort across multiple offices and contractors.
Another tension lies in balancing speed with prudence: moving quickly to field counter-UAS capabilities with Israel is strategically valuable, but it must avoid creating dependencies on a single ally or exposing critical defensive technologies to broader markets without appropriate safeguards.
Try it yourself.
Ask a question in plain English, or pick a topic below. Results in seconds.