More likely though isn't the same as likely. If I'm going to buy an icebreaker from a foreign supplier, sure the US is in the market, but they're still more expensive and take longer than Finland.

To get good at something, good enough that you're competitive on the world stage, you need to be building lots, iterating, getting feedback and so on.

The US coast guard doesn't have the need to kick-start that sort of scale of development. So it takes a fortune (think 10s of billions) to catch up to the Finns.

But the headline number is somewhat irrelevant. 300m sent to Finland is "gone forever". 1.1 billion spent in the US boosts the economy, and ultimately works its way back to the govt in taxes.

The benefits have little to do with "preserving skillset" and more to do with the economic benefit of circulating another billion in the local economy.