Follow us on social

Shutterstock_585901736-scaled

Private equity gobbling up defense firms at a frightening pace: Experts

And with no obligation to disclose financials, companies often ‘disappear into a black box’ after an acquisition.

Reporting | Military Industrial Complex

Private equity firms are rapidly acquiring a greater share of the U.S. defense sector, raising concerns about transparency as global demand for American weapons hits record highs, according to new research from the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI). 

In 2021 alone, private equity funds invested $15 billion in nearly 140 defense-related deals. Firms have acquired some of the world’s largest defense contractors, including Amentum, which claims that it is the second leading provider of services to the U.S. government. (Just last month, Amentum won a $4.7 billion contract with the Air Force.)

Since private funds are not required to share information about their portfolio companies, contractors often “disappear into a black box” after an acquisition, according to SIPRI researchers Lorenzo Scarazzato and Madison Lipson.

“We’re not able to publish data regarding those companies,” Scarazzato said, noting that the “rising trend” of private equity takeovers could make it difficult for SIPRI to maintain its widely-cited list of the world’s largest defense firms. “In a way, our database becomes crippled by the trend.”

And, experts argue, the problems don’t stop there. The risky approach favored by private equity firms increases the chance that contractors could default on their loans, as happened to Constellis Holdings — the successor to Erik Prince’s Blackwater — in 2020. Private equity acquisitions are also a key driver of defense industry consolidation, which could lead to increased costs for taxpayers, according to a recent Pentagon report.

President Joe Biden recently requested $842 billion for next year’s defense budget, over half of which will go to contractors.

Private equity interest in defense companies began in the 2000s, when simultaneous large-scale wars in Iraq and Afghanistan signaled to investors that weapons companies were a safe long-term bet. These deals dropped off briefly in the early 2010s before jumping to new peaks during President Donald Trump’s tenure in office. In 2019, private equity firms carried out 42 percent of total defense contractor takeovers.

Private equity firms now own a controlling stake in AM General, which produces military Humvees and Hummer cars, and Navistar Defense, a leading producer of MRAP armored vehicles.

With demand for arms at record highs, investor excitement has continued to grow. Consultancy firm KPMG argued in a 2021 report that, due to factors like “increased global insecurity” and the covid pandemic, “now is perhaps one of the best times” to invest in defense companies.

As KPMG noted, investors have so far shied away from weapons makers, largely because of ethical investment restrictions from major funders like university endowments. But those concerns don’t apply to contractors who work in “cyber defense and surveillance, which will help to remove such reputational barriers to investment.”

In a 2020 paper, researchers Charles Mahoney, Benjamin Tkach, and Craig Rethmeyer found that private equity takeovers “frequently result in credit downgrades to acquired defense contractors,” making it more likely that companies will default on loans.

They attribute this to the fact that private enterprises are not obligated to share key information about their financial status, shielding them from public scrutiny. By contrast, publicly owned contractors who take big risks “are likely to suffer repercussions including a decrease in share price, negative publicity, and potential management shake-ups.”

“[I]ncreasing the level of financial risk among defense contractors heightens the probability of disruptive credit events that could hinder US national security activities,” the scholars concluded.


(Shutterstock/ Dimj)
Reporting | Military Industrial Complex
Mark Levin
Top photo credit: Erick Stakelbeck on TBN/Screengrab

The great fade out: Neocon influencers rage as they diminish

Media

Mark Levin appears to be having a meltdown.

The veteran neoconservative talk host is repulsed by reports that President Donald Trump might be inching closer to an Iranian nuclear deal, reducing the likelihood of war. In addition to his rants on how this would hurt Israel, Levin has been howling to anyone who will listen that any deal with Iran needs approval from Congress (funny he doesn’t have the same attitude for waging war, only for making peace).

keep readingShow less
american military missiles
Top photo credit: Fogcatcher/Shutterstock

5 ways the military industrial complex is a killer

Latest

Congress is on track to finish work on the fiscal year 2025 Pentagon budget this week, and odds are that it will add $150 billion to its funding for the next few years beyond what the department even asked for. Meanwhile, President Trump has announced a goal of over $1 trillion for the Pentagon for fiscal year 2026.

With these immense sums flying out the door, it’s a good time to take a critical look at the Pentagon budget, from the rationales given to justify near record levels of spending to the impact of that spending in the real world. Here are five things you should know about the Pentagon budget and the military-industrial complex that keeps the churn going.

keep readingShow less
Sudan
Top image credit: A Sudanese army soldier stands next to a destroyed combat vehicle as Sudan's army retakes ground and some displaced residents return to ravaged capital in the state of Khartoum Sudan March 26, 2025. REUTERS/El Tayeb Siddig

Will Sudan attack the UAE?

Africa

Recent weeks events have dramatically cast the Sudanese civil war back into the international spotlight, drawing renewed scrutiny to the role of external actors, particularly the United Arab Emirates.

This shift has been driven by Sudan's accusations at the International Court of Justice (ICJ) against the UAE concerning violations of the Genocide Convention, alongside drone strikes on Port Sudan that Khartoum vociferously attributes to direct Emirati participation. Concurrently, Secretary of State Marco Rubio publicly reaffirmed the UAE's deep entanglement in the conflict at a Senate hearing last week.

From Washington, another significant and sudden development also surfaced last week: the imposition of U.S. sanctions on the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) for alleged chemical weapons use. This dramatic accusation was met by an immediate denial from Sudan's Ministry of Foreign Affairs, which vehemently dismissed the claims as "unfounded" and criticized the U.S. for bypassing the proper international mechanisms, specifically the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, despite Sudan's active membership on its Executive Council.

Despite the gravity of such an accusation, corroboration for the use of chemical agents in Sudan’s war remains conspicuously absent from public debate or reporting, save for a January 2025 New York Times article citing unnamed U.S. officials. That report itself contained a curious disclaimer: "Officials briefed on the intelligence said the information did not come from the United Arab Emirates, an American ally that is also a staunch supporter of the R.S.F."

keep readingShow less

LATEST

QIOSK

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.