The Pay TSA Act of 2026 amends 49 U.S.C. to stop statutory diversions of the passenger security fee (the “9/11 fee”), deposit all such fee receipts into a newly created Transportation Security Trust Fund in DHS, and restrict use of those revenues to defined aviation security purposes. The bill makes Fund balances available to TSA without further appropriation and without fiscal year limitations, while carving out a dedicated Aviation Security Technology and Infrastructure Account for modernization once personnel needs are met.
The practical effect is twofold: it locks the fee to aviation security and creates a ready source of cash TSA can draw during a lapse in appropriations, with an explicit payroll-first priority. That changes budget dynamics for airports, security vendors, TSA operations, and Congress’s appropriations leverage — and raises immediate implementation and oversight questions for DHS and GAO.
At a Glance
What It Does
The bill repeals statutory provisions that allowed diversion of the passenger security fee, establishes the Transportation Security Trust Fund to receive those fees and makes them available to TSA without further appropriation or fiscal-year limitation, and creates an account for aviation security technology investments. During a lapse in appropriations TSA may draw on the Fund to maintain operations, prioritizing salaries and staffing for frontline screening personnel.
Who It Affects
TSA (its personnel and operations), airports (recipients of grants and equipment), aviation security technology vendors, and airline passengers (who pay the underlying 9/11 fee). It also affects Congressional budget managers by reducing the ability to reallocate those fee receipts for non-aviation purposes.
Why It Matters
The bill effectively earmarks an existing passenger fee for TSA operations and creates an off‑budget liquidity source that can sustain screening operations through funding gaps. That stabilizes frontline operations but shifts budgetary flexibility away from appropriators and changes how capital modernization will be sequenced against personnel needs.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
The Pay TSA Act removes two specific subsections of 49 U.S.C. §44940 that previously permitted diversion of the passenger security fee to non-aviation uses. In their place the bill directs all receipts from the fee into a new Transportation Security Trust Fund housed at DHS.
Those deposits are available to the TSA without further appropriation and without being constrained by fiscal-year limitations, meaning balances can be retained and used outside the annual appropriations cycle.
The Fund can be used only for a narrowly defined list of aviation security items — salaries and workforce support, passenger and baggage screening operations, checkpoint and screening technology, airport security infrastructure, and R&D for security systems. The bill expressly bars transfers of Fund money to the Treasury general fund or for deficit reduction, locking the revenue for those aviation purposes alone.To address shutdown risk, the bill authorizes TSA to draw from the Fund during any lapse in appropriations.
Those drawdowns must first cover salaries, benefits, overtime, staffing levels, and other direct frontline operational costs; only after those needs are satisfied may remaining balances be spent on screening technology, baggage equipment, maintenance, and airport grants. The bill limits the rate of operations funded in such periods to not exceed the previous fiscal year’s rate for those TSA programs, and preserves the terms and limitations that applied to TSA programs immediately before a lapse.Within the Fund the bill creates an Aviation Security Technology and Infrastructure Account.
Money in that account is earmarked for procurement, deployment, sustainment, and grants for modern checkpoint and baggage screening systems — including CT scanners and credential authentication technology — but those capital investments cannot be tapped until TSA has satisfied the personnel and operational funding priorities the bill establishes.
The Five Things You Need to Know
The bill repeals subsections (f) and (i) of 49 U.S.C. §44940, eliminating statutory authority to divert passenger security fee receipts away from aviation security.
All passenger security fees collected under 49 U.S.C. §44940 are deposited into a new Transportation Security Trust Fund and are available to TSA without further appropriation or fiscal-year limitation.
During a lapse in appropriations TSA may use Fund balances to continue operations, but the statute requires funds be applied first to salaries, benefits, overtime, and staffing needed for passenger and baggage screening.
The authority to use the Fund during lapses is limited so that funds are provided at a rate for operations not greater than the prior fiscal year’s rate for the described programs and ends once regular or continuing appropriations are enacted.
The bill creates an Aviation Security Technology and Infrastructure Account within the Fund for CT screening systems, credential authentication, exit-lane/perimeter tech, and airport grants, but those capital funds are available only after personnel and operational funding requirements are met.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Repeal of diversion authority in 49 U.S.C. §44940
This provision strikes subsections (f) and (i) of 49 U.S.C. §44940. Practically, it removes the statutory language that previously enabled some uses of passenger security fee receipts outside strictly defined aviation security activities. That change is an explicit statutory restriction on future reprogramming or transfers of these fee receipts to other federal purposes.
Transportation Security Trust Fund: creation, deposits, and use limits
Creates the Transportation Security Trust Fund in DHS and directs all 9/11 passenger security fee collections into it. The bill specifies that Fund amounts are available without further appropriation and without fiscal-year limitation, and enumerates the permissible aviation security uses: personnel costs, screening operations, checkpoint technology, airport security infrastructure, and R&D. The Fund cannot be transferred to the Treasury general fund or used for deficit reduction.
Authority and priorities for drawdowns during appropriations lapses
Authorizes the Administrator to use Fund balances to sustain TSA operations when regular or continuing appropriations are absent. The statute imposes a strict draw priority: first cover salaries, benefits, and overtime for Transportation Security Officers and other screening personnel, then staffing levels and other direct operational expenses. It also limits the operational funding rate to not exceed the previous fiscal year’s rate for the described programs, and makes the authority temporary — ending when appropriations are enacted.
Aviation Security Technology and Infrastructure Account
Establishes a subaccount inside the Fund dedicated to modernization and capital investments: checkpoint tech, CT systems, credential authentication, exit-lane tech, and airport grants. Critically, money in this Account is available only after TSA’s personnel and immediate operational funding requirements are satisfied, which effectively sequences capital spending behind frontline staffing in both normal and lapse scenarios.
Application of existing TSA terms and operational limits
Funds used under the lapse-authority remain subject to the same terms, conditions, and limitations that applied to TSA programs on the date immediately preceding the lapse. That ties emergency use back to existing program structures and requirements, which affects procurement rules, grant conditions, and reporting expectations during Fund drawdowns.
This bill is one of many.
Codify tracks hundreds of bills on Transportation across all five countries.
Explore Transportation 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
- Transportation Security Officers and frontline TSA personnel — The bill prioritizes pay, benefits, overtime, and staffing during funding lapses, reducing the risk of furloughs and pay interruptions for screening staff.
- Airports (especially those seeking grants for security tech) — The Aviation Security Technology and Infrastructure Account authorizes grants and capital investments for checkpoint and baggage systems once personnel needs are met.
- Aviation security technology vendors and integrators — A dedicated fund and explicit authorized uses for CT systems, credential authentication, and related equipment create a more predictable procurement pipeline.
- Passengers and aviation customers — By prioritizing screening operations and creating a continuity resource during shutdowns, the bill aims to reduce checkpoint disruptions and maintain basic security services.
Who Bears the Cost
- Other federal programs and deficit‑reduction efforts — The bill prohibits transfers of the passenger security fee to the Treasury general fund, removing a prior source of discretionary transferability for those receipts.
- Congressional appropriators and budget managers — Earmarking these fee receipts constrains annual appropriations flexibility and reduces a lever for reallocating funds across competing priorities.
- Airline passengers (indirectly) — The policy locks the 9/11 fee revenue to aviation security; while it does not change the fee rate, it limits where that payer-funded revenue can be used, which may shift political pressure around fee levels or cost allocation.
- TSA program offices responsible for capital planning — Because personnel needs are prioritized, TSA offices tasked with modernization may face timing or cash-flow constraints if payroll obligations consume Fund balances.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
The central tension is between two legitimate goals: ensuring uninterrupted, frontline aviation security funding (including during appropriations lapses) and preserving Congress’s constitutional power of the purse and broader budgetary flexibility; the bill secures operational continuity by curtailing appropriators’ ability to reallocate the passenger security fee, but that same move limits fiscal flexibility and raises oversight and prioritization challenges for capitals and modernization investments.
The bill creates a durable, off‑budget source of funding for TSA by making fee receipts available without further appropriation and without fiscal-year limitations. That design secures frontline payroll and operational continuity during funding gaps but also reduces annual appropriators’ control over a revenue stream.
Practically, this raises oversight and accountability questions: DHS and TSA will need clear internal controls and reporting to ensure Fund balances are spent only on the enumerated aviation security purposes and that capital investments are allocated equitably across airports.
Operational sequencing in the statute — where personnel and operational funding must be satisfied before capital projects — is sensible for short-term continuity but creates a trade-off for long-term modernization. Persistent drawdowns to protect payroll could delay procurement and deployment of new screening technology, and the statutory cap tying drawdowns to the prior fiscal year's rate could leave TSA underfunded in the face of unexpected cost growth (inflation, new threat-driven requirements, or rapid tech refresh needs).
Finally, because the law narrows the permitted uses of a fee historically treated as somewhat fungible, agencies and Congress will need to reconcile baseline budgeting and scoring practices with the new earmark.
Try it yourself.
Ask a question in plain English, or pick a topic below. Results in seconds.