The National Institutes of Health (NIH) have long been a pillar of medical and scientific advancement in the United States, funneling billions of dollars into universities to support groundbreaking research. But a recent decision by President Donald Trump to cap funding for university research — a decision currently blocked by a federal judge — threatens to upend this system, potentially jeopardizing not only the progress of scientific discovery but also the economic stability of research institutions across the country.
At the University of Wisconsin-Madison — the sixth largest research university in the country — this cap would translate into an annual loss of approximately $65 million in research funding. The nationwide impact is even more staggering, amounting to billions of dollars in cuts for institutions that rely on NIH grants to support their research infrastructure. The hardest hit area would be indirect costs, or Facilities and Administrative (F&A) costs, funds that cover essential expenses like laboratory equipment, research facilities and staff salaries.
By slashing these funds, Trump is not just cutting back on “administrative overhead” — he is actively dismantling the support systems that make break-through research possible in the first place. It is imperative that this cap does not move forward.
The false logic behind the cap
The justification behind Trump’s decision is reducing administrative overhead and spending on indirect costs allows more money to be spent directly on research. But this reasoning is not just flawed: it is dangerous. Research cannot exist in a vacuum. Laboratories need funding for equipment, technicians and compliance measures. UW-Madison, like other universities, needs funding to maintain facilities where research can take place. Without proper investment in these indirect costs, projects will stall, faculty will struggle to conduct experiments and institutions will continue to face mounting financial strain.
Consider this: UW-Madison currently spends around $18.8 million per week on federal research expenditures, with indirect costs accounting for a substantial portion of that budget. The university’s current indirect cost rate ranges from 27% to 55%, meaning that a hard cap at 15% would significantly disrupt ongoing and future research efforts. The NIH funding cap is more than an inconvenience. It is an existential threat to many of the university’s most critical research initiatives.
A legacy of innovation at risk
Federal research funding has been instrumental in fostering some of the most important medical breakthroughs in recent history. UW-Madison Chancellor Jennifer Mnookin recently released a statement highlighting the role of federal funding in pioneering research advances like the “UW Solution,” a discovery that has extended the viability of organs for transplantation. Other breakthroughs funded through federal research grants at UW-Madison include advancements in cancer and heart attack treatments, medical imaging improvements and innovative diabetes therapies.
Without sustained investment in indirect costs, these critical innovations could grind to a halt. Scientists who depend on reliable funding to carry out experiments may find themselves without the necessary infrastructure to continue their work.
A nationwide setback
The implications of this funding cap stretch far beyond UW-Madison. Research universities across the country depend on indirect cost support to maintain their operations. Without it, institutions will be forced to either absorb these costs themselves — potentially passing the financial burden onto students through higher tuition — or cut back on research activities altogether.
This is not just about the survival of individual universities; it is about the broader impact on public health, technological advancement and economic growth. The U.S. has historically led the world in medical and scientific research, largely due to its robust federal funding system. Trump is weakening that system which threatens the country’s ability to remain at the forefront of global innovation.
In a time when the world is facing urgent health crises, from pandemics to climate-related medical challenges, the last thing we should be doing is hampering the institutions that are best equipped to find solutions.
Universities and research institutions must continue to make their voices heard, and lawmakers must step up to protect the integrity of the nation’s research funding system. The NIH, rather than seeking to arbitrarily cut costs, should be working with universities to ensure that research funding is both efficient and effective.
We cannot afford to treat research funding as an expendable budget item. The long-term consequences of these cuts will far outweigh any short-term financial savings. Scientific innovation is not something that can be switched on and off at will; it requires sustained investment, careful planning and an infrastructure that allows researchers to thrive. The Trump administration must abandon this ill-conceived cap and recommit to a funding system that prioritizes not just the immediate needs of research projects, but the long-term sustainability of the research enterprise as a whole.
