ON FIRST BLUSH, the latest budget crunch forecast at the MBTA looks like déjà vu all over again, to borrow Yogi Berra’s famous phrasing.

The agency has for decades struggled with funding shortages, and requests for Beacon Hill to infuse more cash to stave off service cuts or fare hikes are nothing new. More of the same might actually be welcome, but this time around, the ask could be even tougher.

Updated MBTA financial projections rolled out last week suggest the agency is once again careening toward a shortfall in the next 18-plus months. Making the situation more dire this time is the past year of economic sluggishness and a series of federal funding cuts, which together mean budget math for all of state government — not just the T — is even harder.

One watchdog thinks the “opportunity has sort of faded” for a more permanent funding solution, at least until after the 2026 elections. A task force Healey assigned with studying big-picture transportation funding questions last year concluded the state should lean on the existing surtax on high earners, stopping short of any new taxes and fees that might permanently alter the T’s budget-building outlook.

“Our window to fix this was last year, and we didn’t do it,” said Brian Kane, executive director of the MBTA Advisory Board, which represents cities and towns who help fund the T. “Now the economy has turned, and there’s a new president who’s screwing us on health care and putting a massive deficit in the state budget that has to get filled, which is why everything else has to take a haircut.”

Officials forecast the T, whose $3.24 billion budget increased spending more than 7 percent over the prior year, will end the current budget cycle $239 million in the red. They expect to be able to close that gap by drawing from the agency’s rainy-day fund, which lawmakers and Gov. Maura Healey replenished with $300 million in surtax funds last year.

That savings account would then have about $433 million left over for subsequent years, enough to cover most but not all of the projected $560 million shortfall in fiscal 2027 before a $732 million abyss looms in fiscal 2028.

There are a few factors behind the widening chasm. The T has long grappled with a fundamental mismatch between what it spends and what it brings in, and that’s been amplified by lower post-pandemic ridership as well as a significant increase in spending to staff up and improve service.

MBTA budget-writers also had higher hopes for state funding. Their budget, approved in early June, assumed that Beacon Hill would provide $687 million in so-called contract assistance, a sum that both Gov. Maura Healey and the House proposed.

However, the Senate instead pursued a lower investment, and the final state budget signed into law on July 4 provided the T only $470 million in contract assistance — a significant sum, but nearly a third less than the figure baked into the agency’s spending plan.

If Beacon Hill approves that same level in the next state budget, T officials forecast they will still run massive annual deficits that would need to be closed at some point down the road.

The T’s ever-upbeat general manager, Phil Eng, took a more sunny tone. In an interview with CommonWealth Beacon, Eng emphasized that the projections are “a snapshot in time” that could still change for the better, not a guarantee of a crisis.

Eng said he’s “very optimistic” the Legislature and Healey will maintain high levels of financial support for the T, especially after a fairly consistent period of improving reliability.

“We’ve demonstrated that transportation needs those investments, and I really do believe that despite all the challenges, the Legislature is going to find a way to balance all of the different competing needs,” he said.

MBTA leaders won’t get a final answer on state funding for several months. Healey will unveil her annual state spending proposal next week, and the House and Senate will reply with their own versions later in the spring.

It’s not clear how much money Healey plans to propose for the agency. Her spokesperson, Karissa Hand, said only that the forthcoming annual budget will aim to build on past progress and “continue to fill the T’s budget deficit.”

Top lawmakers say they want to continue to support the MBTA, and hope it can avoid any cost-cutting measures that would impact passengers.

“We have grown back ridership, and I think we’ve restored trust, so I certainly would want to do everything we can to avoid any service cuts or any fare [increases],” said Sen. Brendan Crighton, who co-chairs the Transportation Committee.

Still, Crighton acknowledged that state government is “definitely in a different climate” than it was when Healey and lawmakers weighed the last round of MBTA funding a year ago. Many more holes have erupted in the quilt of state spending that policymakers will want to stitch closed, likely shrinking the pool of resources available for the T.

The federal reconciliation law signed last year is set to decrease state tax collections by nearly $950 million over fiscal years 2026 and 2027 combined. The Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation forecast federal funding for health care will plummet $532 million in fiscal 2026 and nearly $1.4 billion in fiscal 2027. Business groups also continue to push a ballot question that, if approved in November, would cut the state’s income tax rate by a percentage point, which officials say could carry an annual impact of $4.2 billion to $4.8 billion once fully implemented.

“That uncertainty — I think we’ve we felt it for the past year, particularly when you’re trying to craft a budget and constantly adjusting to some of the really poor decisions being made at the federal level,” Crighton, of Lynn, said. “It’s hard to predict, but I think we can say with confidence there’s a commitment to do everything we can to help [the T].”

His House counterpart, Rep. Jim Arciero of Westford, said lawmakers “will review the MBTA needs in the larger schema of transportation while also assessing the many other financial needs across the state.”

Budget chiefs in the Legislature and the Healey administration agreed last week to build the fiscal 2027 state budget on an estimate that tax growth will barely exceed inflation.

The MBTA has limited options available to close its budget gap, Kane said. While some tweaks such as spending less on contractors can help, to achieve major savings, the agency would likely need to cut service, lay off workers, or hike fares (or some combination).

The T has not raised subway fares since 2019 and has not raised bus fares since 2016. Transit advocates and even some officials tend to be squeamish about raising costs on commuters because it can disincentivize ridership.

Eng said “fare increases are not on the table.” His team’s focus is instead on ensuring all riders are paying, including with new commuter rail fare gates at South Station and additional gates set to be installed at Back Bay and Ruggles stations later this year.

Kane argued that shedding employees from current levels is a bad idea, noting that the Federal Transit Administration declared the MBTA’s previously low staffing to be a safety hazard.

He’s open, though, to the argument that the T doesn’t need to keep up such an aggressive pace of staffing expansion. Even the agency’s newest budget projections forecasting a shortfall call for adding another 1,000 positions in the next two years.

“At some point, we need to have a real adult conversation and say, ‘Can we afford this?’ The answer right now is no,” Kane said. “The T has staffed up significantly in the last two years. Maybe they don’t need that next thousand, and maybe that’s okay.”

Of course, the MBTA is not alone. Transit agencies across the country are struggling with their budgets after the pandemic rewired transportation patterns, eating away at fare revenue on which operators long relied, while the costs of running large systems continue to increase.

Lawmakers might be inclined to throw more one-time aid at the T, especially from the surtax, but they don’t seem particularly interested in debating a permanent funding overhaul, especially in an election year.

So for now, the never-ending dance will continue.