News|Articles|April 6, 2026

White House Proposes $5 Billion NIH Cut in FY2027 Budget Request

Listen
0:00 / 0:00

Key Takeaways

  • HHS discretionary funding is proposed at $111.1B for FY2027, down $15.8B, reflecting a 10% non-defense cut strategy paired with a 44% defense increase.
  • NIH would be reduced to $41B with termination of NIMHD, Fogarty, and NCCIH, signaling structural retrenchment beyond topline reductions and targeting perceived DEI-related spending.
SHOW MORE

The administration's latest budget proposal seeks sweeping reductions to federal health research funding, including the elimination of several NIH institutes and centers.

“It's the things that make patients feel really comfortable coming in to do research that have to become kind of like a background job, and it switches everything from being proactive to reactive that pushes things behind.”

The White House released its proposed fiscal year 2027 budget Friday, calling for $111.1 billion in discretionary funding for the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS)—a reduction of $15.8 billion, or 12.5%, compared with the enacted FY2026 budget.1

The proposal is part of a broader push to cut non-defense discretionary spending across the federal government by 10%, while boosting Department of Defense funding by 44%.

For the research community, the most significant element of the proposal is a $5 billion reduction to the National Institutes of Health (NIH), which would bring the agency's funding to $41 billion.

The budget would also eliminate several NIH components entirely, including the National Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities, the Fogarty International Center, which supports global health research, and the National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health. The White House characterized the minority health institute as "replete with DEI expenditures" in the budget documents.

The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, which focuses on safe healthcare delivery practices, would face a $129 million cut under the proposal—funding the White House described as "wasteful or duplicative" of NIH research. The agency has already lost more than half its staff since September 2024 following HHS restructuring and broader federal workforce reductions.

However, Congress ultimately controls federal appropriations. The Trump administration pursued similar cuts to HHS funding last year, but lawmakers responded by increasing the department's budget rather than reducing it.

Response from ASCO

Under this new budget proposal, the National Cancer Institute (NCI) would receive a modest increase. In response, the Association for Clinical Oncology (ASCO) released a statement from Board Chair Lynn M. Schuchter, MD, FASCO.2

“ASCO is concerned by the White House’s proposal to reduce support for NIH at a time when we are seeing unprecedented progress in cancer prevention, detection, and treatment, much of which builds on scientific advances from across the institutes,” Schuchter said. “For decades, robust federal funding has led to lifesaving discoveries and brought hope to millions of families. NIH funding drives advances in medical research and discovery across all diseases and specialties. NIH funding cuts risk stalling momentum toward cures, including those for cancer.”

Earlier funding picture looked different

Earlier this year, Congress unveiled a bipartisan funding package that told a markedly different story for federal health research. That legislation allocated $116.8 billion to HHS for 2026—a $210 million increase over 2025—with the NIH receiving $48.7 billion and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) budgeted at $9.2 billion.3

Under that package, NIH allocations included funding increases across several institutes, among them the NCI, the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke, and the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.

The CDC's portion restored funding for domestic and global HIV/AIDS programs that had been stripped in an earlier House version of the bill, and included increases for public health data modernization and infrastructure.

Industry insight on funding cuts

Last year, when funding cuts first came to the forefront, Applied Clinical Trials spoke with Kyle McAllister, co-founder, CEO, Trially, about how clinical trial budget cuts are threatening patient recruitment and retention, as well as the potential long-term ripple effects on trial timelines and healthcare innovation.

“Unfortunately, the things that get stretched thin or become almost like a side hustle to a lot of these folks, is recruitment, it's retention, it's calling patients before and after visits,” McAllister said in a video interview. “It's the things that make patients feel really comfortable coming in to do research that have to become kind of like a background job, and it switches everything from being proactive to reactive that pushes things behind.”

References

1. White House seeks 12% cut to HHS in 2027. Healthcare Dive. April 3, 2026. Accessed April 6, 2026. https://www.healthcaredive.com/news/white-house-hhs-2027-fiscal-year-budget-request-12-percent-cut/816639/

2. Proposed NIH Cuts, Funding Changes Risk Slowing Cancer Research. ASCO. April 3, 2026. Accessed April 6, 2026. https://www.asco.org/about-asco/press-center/news-releases/proposed-nih-cuts-funding-changes-risk-slowing-cancer-research

3. Congressional Funding Deal Boosts Research Space Ahead of Shutdown Deadline. Applied Clinical Trials. January 22, 2026. Accessed April 6, 2026. https://www.appliedclinicaltrialsonline.com/view/congressional-funding-deal-research-shutdown-deadline