[Goose]

The most negative thing you could say is that the U.S. might be overvaluing the military aid it is providing if, for example, it is using some methodology for book value that is too disconnected from actual FMV.

No "might" about it. All military equipment that is surplus to requirements should be radically depreciated in terms of "net present value", as it is unlikely to ever be used again. We don't do that, at least not on paper. In reality, the services know lots of that stuff isn't useful and act accordingly, but their evaluation is based on utility, not replacement cost or "book value". The cluster munition armed shorter range ATACMS (M39) rockets have turned out to be extremely valuable to Ukraine, but the US was never going to replace them. However, they were given to Ukraine as if we would and were accounted for as such. Their salvage value was actually negative, as it would cost money to dispose of them.

[Goose]

The most negative thing you could say is that the U.S. might be overvaluing the military aid it is providing if, for example, it is using some methodology for book value that is too disconnected from actual FMV.

No "might" about it. All military equipment that is surplus to requirements should be radically depreciated in terms of "net present value", as it is unlikely to ever be used again. We don't do that, at least not on paper. In reality, the services know lots of that stuff isn't useful and act accordingly, but their evaluation is based on utility, not replacement cost or "book value". The cluster munition armed shorter range ATACMS (M39) rockets have turned out to be extremely valuable to Ukraine, but the US was never going to replace them. However, they were given to Ukraine as if we would and were accounted for as such. Their salvage value was actually negative, as it would cost money to dispose of them.