Nearly $100 Billion in COVID Relief Money Remains Unspent
State governments have until the end of 2026 to spend the cash, even though Congress ended the COVID-19 emergency declaration last year.

Nearly $100 billion of money allocated to help state and local governments through the COVID-19 pandemic remains unspent.
That's the conclusion of a report published this week by the Government Accountability Office (GAO).
The American Rescue Plan Act of 2021, passed soon after President Joe Biden took office, allocated $1.9 trillion intended to speed up the nation's recovery from the pandemic. That total included $350 billion for Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds (SLFRF), a U.S. Treasury Department program that awarded grants to state, local, territorial, and tribal governments.
"Most ($325.5 billion) of the $350 billion" went to "states, the District of Columbia, and local governments," according to the GAO report. "SLFRF recipients have until December 31, 2024, to obligate their SLFRF awards and generally have until December 31, 2026, to spend their awards." Of that amount, D.C. and state governments received $195.8 billion.
As of September 30, 2023, the latter group "reported obligating 73 percent ($142.4
billion)" of their total and "spending 53 percent ($103.7 billion)."
In other words, state and D.C. governments are sitting on $92 billion in unspent COVID-19 relief money, more than $53 billion of which has not even been earmarked for anything.
This factoid is made all the more awkward because this week also marks one year since Biden signed a congressional resolution officially declaring an end to the COVID-19 national emergency. And yet, six months later, tens of billions of dollars meant to help state and local governments through that crisis remain unspent.
The GAO report notes that all but eight states spent at least 25 percent of their allotted cash, while the others—Alaska, California, Hawaii, Illinois, Maryland, Minnesota, Pennsylvania, and Washington—spent 75 percent or more of their allotments, with Alaska spending 96 percent and Minnesota spending 99 percent of their respective totals.
All states and D.C. had "obligated" at least 25 percent of their allotments, and nearly half—23 states—"reported obligating over 75 percent," the report found.
The findings were similar among cities, counties, and other "non-entitlement units of local government (NEU)," smaller localities that make up nearly 85 percent of the category. These smaller entities "reported obligating 64 percent ($80.1 billion) and spending 47 percent ($59.4 billion) of their $126.1 billion in SLFRF allocations."
That leaves $66.7 billion in COVID-19 relief funds that city, county, and local governments are sitting on, $46 billion of which has not even been apportioned to anything.
In all, out of the hundreds of billions of taxpayer dollars that Congress spent to help state and local governments pull themselves out of the COVID-19 pandemic, nearly $100 billion—more than a quarter of the total—remains not only unspent but without a plan in place for what to spend it on. And yet they have until the end of 2026 to spend it all, even though the emergency declaration that nominally authorized the expenditure in the first place ended a year ago.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
"a report published this week by the Government Accountability Office (GAO)."
Government accountability ... ROFL ... sarcasm not intended?!
So are we to assume that giving it back to us is not an option?
It must be spent!
And they're gonna need more!
The incentive is to spend it all and then some so you can demand a bigger budget next year.
It’s not like the private sector you are rewarded for getting things done with fewer resources.
In the public sector you get rewarded for finding popular ways to spend money that isn’t yours.
People respond to incentives. Economic way of thinking 101.
Domt worry Sarc. Your precious democrats will spend every penny, and more.
I'll take it. I'll even burn 90% of it. I'll have done more to curb inflation than anyone else.
Can we just send it directly to Ukraine and cut out the middle men?
Not only are we giving Ukraine guns, but we're paying all the salaries in their government. They don't have an economy or a tax base. They're at war. But the people in government want paychecks. We're paying for that. In addition to munitions.
It’s more like hush money than it is paychecks.
Just think, if OrangeMan Bad had remained president this might not be happening. But now we have your democrat friends instead.
So... of the $1.9 trillion allocated, nearly $100 billion is not yet spent. That means that only a little over $1.8 trillion was wasted.
>>sitting on $92 billion in unspent COVID-19 relief money, more than $53 billion of which has not even been earmarked for anything.
B can erase debt can he not simply erase electronic cash?
"Nearly $100 Billion in COVID Relief Money Remains Unspent."
Don't worry, folks.
Somehow, some way, this money will end up in some politician's offshore bank account.
Here’s a novel thought, Reason.
ADVOCATE FOR NOT SPENDING IT.
Instead of critiquing govt for failures to spend, advocate for steps that reduce inflation and reduce the deficit.
So don't spend it. 34 trillion in debt is plenty already.
Well, then give it back .
Do the state governments have to provide matching funds, or spend anything except for paperwork, to get the COVID "relief"? If you don't need the money and have to add more money to spend under (probably nonsensical constraints in order to get it, it often will make sense to pass. In fact, if you are required to spend it on stupid and counterproductive stuff, it makes sense to pass even if you'll come out ahead monetarily. E.g, funding for elementary schools to perform sex change operations on their students is best not spent! Money to put everyone in isolation chambers to "flatten the curve" should also be refused.
Or is the paperwork so complex that doing it costs a billion? Have they applied for the funding and are still waiting for some federal agency to approve their proposed use?
If you can't say which, don't write the article to imply it's the states' fault.
Get ready to hear about more "inflation."