Passing an audit isn't having its checkbook balanced. Passing an audit is like your employer delivering a full and accurate account of how many chairs it owns, as well as providing all the necessary paper trail for how all of them were acquired, moved, and discarded.

Doable in a 5-person company, or a 50-person company, next to impossible in a 5,000-person company, actually impossible in a 500,000 person company.

And the DoD has hundreds of thousands of different types of such items to keep track of, all of which were tracked by disparate physical-fingers-counting-stuff accounting systems, that were historically not up to the expected standards. Updating them and reconciling all of them is a long process, which the DoD is working through.

I hate war departments as much as the next liberal, but I also recognize that this is an incredibly difficult ask.

And that the failures are generally not caused by Lt. Billy Bob filching Stinger missiles to sell to some warlord in East Oblastan.

The grift in the DoD comes from contracts for buying more crap that it doesn't need, or for paying good money for contract work that doesn't get done (Iraq, Afghanistan), not from having stuff that was bought 'fall off the back of the truck'. The organization "has* an audit problem, but it's main issue is one of procurement.