Yes there is - and all member states have fulfilled those very, very tiny payments precisely. NATO owns pair of AWACS, and handful of surveillance drones, and the HQ - that is it.I would assume there is a relatively fixed amount for NATO's budget.
Except it won't since there is no 'NATO budget' towards which that 'recommended' 2% share would go. The possible increase would only and solely affect the military budget of that exact member state in question, not NATO as a whole, nor the contributions of other NATO member states nor would it increase that country's direct contribution to NATO in any manner. Which also means that no matter how much any or even all of them would increase their share it still would not affect the US military spending one way or the other. It is not a zero sum game.If the other nations pay their "recommended" share (which is recommended for a reason) then it is only logical that the share for the U.S. will go down. I may not have to pay less in taxes (although that is exactly what has happened over the last year), but the money could be used for other programs and services, just like some NATO nations do.
This is not really relevant.I mean, let me ask you the converse: if nations who are paying nowhere near their "recommended" amount do so, what happens to the taxpayers in those nations? Without a tax increase something has to give somewhere else. It's simply fiscal reality.