The Trump administration is asking Congress for $672 million to remove Iranian nuclear materials, fund inspections, and expand counterproliferation operations across the Middle East, a concrete dollar figure attached to a diplomatic effort whose final shape remains unsettled. The request, shared with Fox News Digital by a White House official, is embedded inside a broader $80 billion supplemental funding package tied to the costs of Operation Epic Fury and the replenishment of U.S. munitions stockpiles.
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth briefed members of the House Republican Study Committee on the full package. The text of the $80 billion request is expected to reach Congress in the coming days.
The $672 million slice would flow to the Department of Energy and cover a wide range of activities: physical removal or elimination of Iranian nuclear materials, including uranium hexafluoride (UF6), uranium in various forms, and highly enriched uranium research reactor fuel, plus U.S. verification operations inside Iran, support for International Atomic Energy Agency inspections, nuclear-smuggling detection, and an expansion of Nuclear Emergency Support Team operations throughout the region.
A White House official described the funding as supporting "activities that would terminate Iran's ability to develop or acquire a nuclear weapon, including the disposition of proliferation of sensitive material, technology, equipment, and infrastructure."
The funding request arrives against the backdrop of a June 17 memorandum of understanding signed by the United States and the Islamic Republic of Iran. That document set the floor for negotiations over roughly 900 pounds of uranium enriched to near-weapons grade, material whose ultimate fate remains the central unanswered question of the talks.
The MOU's own language describes the minimum acceptable pathway as "downblending," the process of diluting highly enriched uranium to reduce its concentration. The relevant passage states that the two nations "have agreed to resolve the disposition of stockpile enriched material pursuant to a mechanism that will be mutually agreed upon in accordance with the schedule mentioned in paragraph seven with the minimum methodology to be down blended on site under the supervision of the IAEA."
That language, "minimum methodology", leaves room for more aggressive measures, including outright removal of the material from Iran. But neither side has publicly said whether they have reached an agreement on what will actually happen to the stockpile. The sweeping terms of the proposed Iran deal have drawn intense scrutiny, and the gap between the MOU's baseline and the administration's stated ambitions is where the real negotiation lives.
The MOU kicked off a round of technical talks in Switzerland led by Vice President JD Vance. Those discussions aim to translate the broad framework into a detailed, enforceable agreement governing Iran's nuclear program and stockpile.
One tangible result so far: Iran agreed to allow IAEA inspectors back into the country for the first time since U.S. and Israeli military strikes targeted Iranian nuclear infrastructure. Vance described the return of inspectors as a "major milestone."
President Trump posted on Truth Social that "Iran has fully and completely agreed to highest level Nuclear inspections long into the future (Infinity!!!)" and added, "If they did not agree to this, there would be no further negotiations!"
Secretary of State Marco Rubio struck a more measured tone, saying he wants the deal between the U.S. and Iran to succeed, but adding that if it doesn't, "the president knows what his options are." Rubio did not specify what those options entail. Given that the Senate narrowly rejected a Democratic bid to limit Trump's Iran war powers, the administration retains significant latitude.
The scale of the funding request reflects the sheer physical and logistical challenge of dealing with a hostile nation's nuclear materials. The closest historical parallel cited in the administration's framing is Project Sapphire, a 1994 covert operation in which the United States removed roughly 600 kilograms of highly enriched uranium from Kazakhstan after the collapse of the Soviet Union.
That operation required weeks of repackaging, extensive security precautions, and military airlift operations, and Kazakhstan was a cooperative partner, not an adversary. Iran presents a fundamentally different security environment, which helps explain the nine-figure price tag for verification, removal, and support activities.
The broader $80 billion supplemental package covers the costs of Operation Epic Fury, the U.S. offensive campaign against Iran, and the rebuilding of munitions stockpiles drawn down during the conflict. The $672 million nuclear component sits within that total, according to the White House official's description of the request.
That Hegseth chose the House Republican Study Committee as his audience for the briefing is itself telling. The RSC is the largest conservative caucus in the House, and securing its buy-in early signals the administration's awareness that an $80 billion ask, even one tied to national security, will face fiscal scrutiny from the right flank. The administration appears to be making its case to the members most likely to demand justification before a vote.
For all the diplomatic momentum the administration has generated, the hardest questions remain open. Will Iran's enriched uranium stay inside the country and be downblended under IAEA supervision? Or will it be physically removed, shipped out of Iran entirely, as the United States did with Kazakhstan's material three decades ago? The MOU sets downblending as the floor, but the $672 million request funds removal activities, suggesting the administration is at minimum preparing for the more aggressive option.
The preservation of Trump's authority on Iran in the Senate has given the White House room to maneuver. But Congressional appropriators will want answers about what, precisely, $672 million buys, and whether the deal being negotiated in Switzerland actually requires Iran to give up material or merely dilute it in place.
Democrats have pushed repeatedly to constrain the president's hand on Iran. Those efforts have failed so far. The Senate rejected another Democratic attempt to restrict Trump's military authority on the matter, leaving the administration's diplomatic and military leverage intact.
The administration's willingness to put a specific dollar figure on denuclearization, and to route it through the Department of Energy rather than the State Department, signals a preference for technical execution over diplomatic symbolism. Whether that approach produces an enforceable agreement or a framework that Iran can slow-walk remains the question that $672 million alone cannot answer.
Money can move uranium. Only accountability can move a regime that has spent decades proving it cannot be trusted with it.
