For years, the Major Richard Star Act appeared to have something Congress rarely sees: overwhelming bipartisan support from nearly 80 senators, more than 330 members of the House, major veterans service organizations and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, with a price tag that, while significant, was widely viewed as manageable.

The legislation seeks to end a decades-old offset that forces many combat-injured medically retired veterans to forfeit a portion of their retirement pay for every dollar they receive in VA disability compensation. Supporters have long argued the policy amounts to penalizing service members for injuries sustained in combat, calling it a “Wounded Veteran Tax.”

Then Congress introduced a revised version of the legislation in March 2025.

When the Congressional Budget Office evaluated H.R. 2102, the current version of the Major Richard Star Act, its new cost estimate projected the bill would increase direct spending to $78.1 billion over 10 years, roughly $68 billion more than CBO’s estimate for the bill’s 2023 predecessor.

The revised estimate transformed the conversation surrounding one of Congress’ most broadly supported veterans bills and prompted a question that still remains unresolved:

What changed between the 2023 and 2025 versions of the Richard Star Act to increase the projected cost so dramatically?

The answer isn’t simply a larger number. It lies at the intersection of legislative drafting, statutory interpretation, DoD actuarial data and congressional budget scoring, where even subtle changes can reshape both the projected cost of legislation and its political future.

Two provisions with a $65 billion price tag

CBO’s explanation points to two provisions it concluded were added to H.R. 2102 that were not included in H.R. 1282.

The first would make Chapter 61 military retirees with fewer than 20 years of service eligible for Concurrent Retired and Disability Pay (CRDP), a benefit generally limited under current law to military retirees who completed at least 20 years of service. CBO estimated that provision alone would increase direct spending by approximately $63 billion over the 2026–2036 period.

The second provision would remove an existing cap on CRDP payments for Chapter 61 retirees with at least 20 years of service, adding another estimated $2 billion.

Together, CBO concluded those two provisions accounted for roughly $65 billion of the increase between the previous and current versions of the legislation.

For years, supporters understood the Richard Star Act as legislation intended to restore concurrent receipt for approximately 54,000 combat-injured Chapter 61 retirees whose military retired pay is reduced because they also receive VA disability compensation.

Its estimated cost, roughly $10 billion over a decade, was substantial but comparatively modest within the context of major veterans legislation. Then the revised estimate changed the conversation.

A different understanding of the revisions

Congressional staffers in Sen. Blumenthal’s office involved in developing both H.R. 1282 and H.R. 2102 understood the revisions differently than CBO ultimately interpreted them, explaining that the legislative revisions were intended to address a narrow gap affecting approximately 1,124 combat-injured Chapter 61 retirees who remained excluded under previous versions of the bill. Under that understanding, the intended affected population would increase from roughly 54,000 to about 56,000 veterans.

CBO reached a different conclusion.

Its estimate states that approximately 255,000 Chapter 61 retirees with fewer than 20 years of service would become eligible for concurrent receipt under H.R. 2102. That broader interpretation accounts for nearly the entire increase between the previous estimate and the March 2025 score.

CBO has reaffirmed its estimate, explaining that it evaluated the statutory changes contained in H.R. 2102 using population data provided by the Department of Defense’s Office of the Actuary, which identified the class of retirees CBO concluded would become newly eligible under the legislation.

The result is a striking disconnect between Congress’ stated intent and CBO’s interpretation of the revised bill. Military Times also asked the Department of Defense about its role in providing information used during CBO’s analysis. DoD did not respond by publication.

The stakes

For the combat-injured retirees who have spent years advocating for the Richard Star Act, the legislation has never been about budget estimates. It has been about restoring military retired pay they argue they earned through their service and sacrifice. But in Congress, budget scores influence legislative prospects.

CBO has explained how it arrived at its estimate. What remains unclear is why congressional offices involved in drafting the revisions believed the legislation would affect roughly 56,000 combat-injured retirees while CBO concluded the revised language would extend eligibility to a much broader population.

That difference transformed a bill long understood to carry a price tag of about $10 billion into legislation projected to cost $78.1 billion over a decade, fundamentally altering its prospects in Congress.

Before her death in 2024, in an interview with Wounded Warrior Project, Tonya Star, widow of Maj. Richard Star, reflected on what passage of the legislation would mean to the veterans and families it was designed to help:

“It’s not just a rubber stamp; this will affect their day-to-day life and help them provide for their families… This would be their win.”