What Happened

A federal government-wide funding gap lasted 42 full days from Oct. 1 through Nov. 11, 2025, ending when legislation restoring funding was signed Nov. 12. [](#ngr-50eb6108-a7b4-45a1-9cb4-adf96321df16)

A Congressional Research Service report titled "Past Government Shutdowns: Key Resources" compiles government documents, CRS reports and other resources examining previous federal shutdowns. CRS serves as nonpartisan shared staff to congressional committees and members of Congress.

The 2025 shutdown was followed by additional funding lapses in 2026. A brief partial shutdown began Jan. 31 after funding expired for several departments and agencies before Congress completed additional appropriations legislation.

A separate and substantially longer funding lapse later affected the Department of Homeland Security. DHS funding expired Feb. 14 amid a congressional dispute over the department's appropriations, producing a partial shutdown limited primarily to DHS rather than the government-wide lapse that occurred in fall 2025. The DHS funding gap continued until April 30, making it the most recent major federal funding lapse.

These shutdowns differed in scope because Congress had already enacted full-year appropriations for some agencies. A lapse in funding therefore does not necessarily mean the entire federal government shuts down. When appropriations expire without new funding legislation, affected federal agencies generally must stop activities funded by those appropriations under the Antideficiency Act. Not all government operations stop, however. Activities may continue when funding remains legally available or when another legal exception applies, including certain activities necessary to protect human life or property.

Why Does it Matter to Me?

Federal shutdowns can affect government employees, contractors, national parks, federal benefit administration and small-business programs, though the precise effects depend on which agencies lose funding and how agencies implement their contingency plans.

The more recent DHS funding lapse illustrates why the scope of a shutdown matters. Agencies outside DHS that already had appropriations could continue operating normally, while affected DHS components had to operate under funding-lapse procedures. Employees performing legally excepted functions could continue working even without current appropriations, while other employees could be furloughed.

For businesses that contract with the federal government, the consequences can also be complicated. During a funding lapse, affected agencies generally cannot award new contracts, exercise contract options that create additional obligations, make modifications that increase government obligations or commit additional funds under certain existing agreements unless an exception applies.

Even contracts that were fully funded before a shutdown can face disruption when furloughed federal employees are unavailable to perform inspections, approve work, accept deliveries or carry out other contract-administration functions.

Some new obligations may still be permitted when they fall within recognized exceptions to the Antideficiency Act or are supported by funding that remains legally available. Whether work can continue therefore depends on the source of funding, the terms of the contract and the legal authority for the activity.

Both Sides, Now

Lawmakers from both parties have introduced proposals intended to change how the government operates during funding lapses, although the proposals differ substantially in scope and approach.

Congress has considered such measures for years. During the 2013 shutdown, Congress enacted the Pay Our Military Act, P.L. 113-39, to provide appropriations for certain military and civilian personnel. Lawmakers also introduced H.R.2677 and H.R.2706, proposals that addressed state assistance to keep certain federal facilities operating during that shutdown.

More recent proposals include H.R.5660, the Pay Our Military Act, which was introduced Sept. 30, 2025, and would provide continuing appropriations for military pay during a funding lapse.

The Senate has also considered S.Res.526, a resolution providing for senators' pay to be withheld during a government shutdown. The Senate Rules and Administration Committee considered the resolution at a business meeting Dec. 11. The Senate later agreed to the resolution by voice vote May 14 after voting 99-0 to invoke cloture on the motion to proceed the previous day.

The House Appropriations Committee held a hearing titled "Funding Lapses: Analyzing Shutdown Reform" on July 22 to examine broader proposals for preventing or limiting future funding lapses.

Supporters of shutdown reforms have argued that changes could reduce disruptions for federal employees, contractors and the public. Proposals have included automatic continuing appropriations and targeted protections for particular government functions. Other lawmakers have raised concerns about how automatic funding mechanisms could affect Congress' constitutional authority over federal spending or reduce pressure to complete the annual appropriations process.

What Happens Next?

The CRS report cautions that it can be difficult to predict the effects of future shutdowns because the circumstances surrounding each funding lapse differ and agencies may make different operational decisions within the limits of federal law.

The Antideficiency Act provides the central statutory framework governing agency operations during a lapse in appropriations. Opinions issued by Attorney General Benjamin Civiletti in 1980 and 1981 helped establish the modern executive branch interpretation of how agencies should apply those restrictions when appropriations expire.

Congress continues to consider proposals addressing future funding lapses. Some focus on particular consequences, such as military pay, while others would make broader changes to the appropriations process.

---

This article was generated by AI pulling from data. Each article is edited by an editor for accuracy and clarity.

---

Spot something wrong? Report an issue with this article