SB 1045 authorizes the Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration to draw on amounts in the Airport and Airway Trust Fund (AATF) that are not otherwise appropriated when Congress fails to enact regular appropriations or a continuing resolution for the FAA. The text covers ongoing programs, projects, and activities that were funded in the prior fiscal year, and explicitly includes Accounts such as Operations; Facilities and Equipment; Research, Engineering, and Development; Grants-in-Aid for Airports; and costs tied to direct loans and loan guarantees.
The bill matters because it ends the immediate operational risk that lapses in appropriations pose to aviation safety, airports, and air traffic services, but it does so by reallocating cash-flow risk to a dedicated trust fund and by narrowing Congress’s practical leverage in future funding negotiations. It also adds a technical Internal Revenue Code cross-reference to give statutory cover for AATF expenditures during a lapse, while preserving several exceptions where other laws already provide or prohibit funding.
At a Glance
What It Does
If a fiscal-year appropriation for the FAA is not in place at the start of the year, the bill makes AATF balances that are not otherwise appropriated available to keep FAA programs running. Funding under the bill is limited to the prior fiscal year’s "rate for operations," subject to the same terms and conditions that applied in the preceding year, and remains available until a regular appropriation or an across-the-board continuing resolution becomes law.
Who It Affects
The FAA and its workforce, airport sponsors and recipients of Airport Improvement Program grants, aviation industry stakeholders that rely on FAA services (air carriers, air traffic control contractors, certification applicants), and custodians of the AATF (passenger tax revenue users and DOT/OST budget officials). It also affects Congressional appropriations committees because it changes the dynamics of shutdown leverage.
Why It Matters
It creates a durable continuity-of-operations mechanism for aviation without a supplemental appropriation, setting a precedent for using dedicated trust fund balances to backstop program continuity during government shutdowns. That reduces immediate service disruption risk but concentrates fiscal exposure in the trust fund and raises practical and accounting questions for DOT and Congress.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
The bill sets a simple trigger: when no regular appropriation or joint resolution providing continuing appropriations is in effect for the FAA at the start of the fiscal year (or when a lapse otherwise occurs), the FAA may draw on AATF amounts not already appropriated to keep programs going. The draw is limited to activities that were funded in the prior fiscal year, and the statute explicitly covers operations, facilities and equipment, research and development, airport grants, and the costs of direct loans and loan guarantees.
Funding drawn under the statute is constrained by two practical rules. First, the level for operations cannot exceed the "rate for operations" used in the prior fiscal year appropriation or, if no act was enacted then, the rate in the prior-year continuing resolution.
Second, any amounts used while the lapse is ongoing must conform to the same terms and conditions that governed those programs in the preceding year—so existing restrictions, eligibility rules, and statutory conditions carry forward for the lapse period.Availability and accounting are handled to prevent downstream ambiguity: funds become available at the start of a lapse and stay available until a regular appropriation bill or a continuing-resolution joint resolution is enacted. If the authorization under this bill is in effect when a fiscal year ends, it carries funding levels into the next fiscal year until the regular appropriations measure is signed.
Once Congress does enact the applicable appropriation or a joint resolution, expenditures and obligations charged under this authority are allocated back to the applicable appropriation or fund.The bill also makes a narrow amendment to the Internal Revenue Code (section 9502(d)(1)(A)) to add the Aviation Funding Stability Act of 2025 as an explicit expenditure authority for the AATF. Finally, the statute contains a fail-safe: it does not apply to any program or period where some other law already supplies funding or explicitly prohibits continuation—so it yields to other express statutory funding directions.
The Five Things You Need to Know
The bill authorizes the FAA to use AATF balances not otherwise appropriated to continue programs during a lapse in appropriations.
It explicitly covers the prior year’s FAA accounts—Operations; Facilities and Equipment; Research, Engineering, and Development; and Grants-in-Aid for Airports—and includes costs of direct loans and loan guarantees.
Funding during a lapse is capped at a "rate for operations" that cannot exceed the prior fiscal year’s corresponding rate (or the prior-year continuing resolution rate if no appropriation became law).
Amounts are available from the start of the lapse until a regular appropriation bill or a joint resolution making continuing appropriations becomes law, and if the authorization is active at the fiscal-year end it continues into the next fiscal year.
The bill amends Internal Revenue Code section 9502(d)(1)(A) to add this Act as a statutory expenditure authority for the Airport and Airway Trust Fund.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Short title
Provides the Act’s name: the Aviation Funding Stability Act of 2025. This is a drafting formality but also matters for citation in other statutes and for the IRC cross-reference the bill later adds.
Trigger and scope for AATF availability
Establishes the operative trigger: if no appropriation for the FAA is enacted by the start of the fiscal year, or no joint resolution making continuing appropriations is in effect, then AATF amounts not otherwise appropriated become available to the FAA. The provision ties covered programs to what was funded in the preceding fiscal year, which narrows scope to existing activities rather than creating new ones. It also specifies that if the preceding year's appropriation did not become law, the relevant reference point is the prior-year continuing resolution.
Rate-for-operations cap and carryover of conditions
Limits the amount the FAA can access by reference to a prior-year "rate for operations," preventing automatic increases during a lapse. This subsection effectively freezes annual operations funding at last year’s operational rate for the duration of the lapse. It also imports the prior year’s statutory terms and conditions onto any amounts used under the authority, so eligibility rules and program restrictions continue to apply during the lapse period.
Availability period, fiscal-year carryover, and accounting
Specifies that AATF-funded continuations run from the first day of the lapse until the regular appropriation or continuing resolution becomes law, and that if the statute is in effect at a fiscal-year boundary, funding levels carry into the following year. It requires that expenditures and obligations made during the lapse be charged to the applicable appropriation, fund, or authorization when Congress later enacts the appropriation—this creates a retroactive accounting mechanism intended to reconcile trust-fund disbursements with eventual appropriations.
Internal Revenue Code amendment to authorize expenditure
Amends section 9502(d)(1)(A) of the Internal Revenue Code by adding the Aviation Funding Stability Act of 2025 to the list of laws that permit expenditure from the AATF. That technical change supplies statutory authority so that AATF custodians can legally disburse trust-fund dollars in the absence of an appropriation, reducing legal exposure for Treasury and DOT officials who would otherwise question the appropriation status of such payments.
Exceptions where other law controls
Carves out situations where this authority does not apply: if another statute during that fiscal period already makes funds available or expressly says no funds shall be available, then the bill’s mechanism yields. This is a narrow non-duplication rule that preserves the primacy of express statutory funding directions.
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
- FAA operations and workforce — Keeps air traffic control, safety oversight, and certification activities funded during lapses so frontline services and employees are not immediately furloughed.
- Airport sponsors and AIP recipients — Preserves continuity of certain grants and project funding flows that would otherwise be disrupted by an appropriations lapse.
- Air carriers and passengers — Reduces risk of service interruptions caused by FAA operational shutdowns (e.g., flight delays tied to staffing shortfalls or paused certifications).
- Borrowers and participants in FAA loan programs — Maintains funding for the costs of direct loans and loan guarantees, protecting ongoing financing arrangements from interruption.
- DOT and Treasury officials — Gain clear statutory cover to make trust-fund disbursements during lapses, reducing immediate legal uncertainty about making payments.
Who Bears the Cost
- Airport and Airway Trust Fund principals — The AATF shoulder the short-term cash outlays, which can deplete balances otherwise available for future projects and capital grants.
- Congressional appropriations committees — Lose some leverage during shutdown negotiations because the FAA can continue operations without a fresh appropriation, altering bargaining dynamics.
- DOT/FAA budget and accounting offices — Bear additional administrative burden to track, reconcile, and retroactively charge obligations to later appropriations and to report on trust-fund usage.
- Future airport and aviation projects — May face delayed or reduced funding if the trust fund balance is drawn down to maintain operations during extended lapses.
- Potentially taxpayers or other trust-fund stakeholders — If statutory replenishment or offsets are required later, the fiscal burden could shift to budget measures or user fees down the line.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
The central dilemma is continuity versus control: the bill guarantees continuous FAA operations during funding gaps, protecting safety and service, but it does so by shifting the financial burden onto a dedicated trust fund and by reducing Congress’s immediate leverage in appropriations—an outcome that secures near-term operations while creating longer-term questions about fund integrity, prioritization, and legislative oversight.
The bill trades two different policy goals against one another without specifying operational guardrails. It reduces immediate operational risk by letting FAA continue to run, but it places cash-flow and solvency risk on the Airport and Airway Trust Fund without a statutory floor or explicit prioritization among competing trust-fund demands.
The statute’s retroactive charging requirement fixes an accounting path, but it still leaves open practical sequencing questions: if AATF balances are insufficient mid-lapse, the text does not set a priority among operations, grants, and loan-related costs, nor does it authorize borrowing or transfers from other funds. Implementers will need to translate the high-level authority into day-to-day payout rules.
The IRC cross-reference removes one legal obstacle to disbursement, but other legal and budgetary questions remain. For example, the bill does not explicitly reconcile its mechanism with the Anti-Deficiency Act’s prohibitions on obligating funds absent an appropriation, beyond relying on the AATF authority; agency lawyers and OMB will still need to interpret how the law interacts with established apportionment and obligation controls.
The provision that carries funding across a fiscal-year boundary raises scoring questions and may complicate how CBO and the Treasury reflect AATF balances on budget documents. Finally, because the statute yields to other express funding laws, implementers must create a crosswalk to identify when this authority is preempted—an operationally complex compliance task during fast-moving funding disputes.
Try it yourself.
Ask a question in plain English, or pick a topic below. Results in seconds.