Staggering Incompetence Exposed as Audit Probes Elon Musk's Ghost Government Contract Savings

A new Government Accountability Office audit has raised significant questions about Elon Musk's Department of Government Efficiency savings claims, finding that billions of dollars in reported savings were either unsupported by available evidence or linked to contracts that had not actually been terminated.

The report, released this month, scrutinised roughly $110 billion (£82 billion) in savings listed on DOGE's 'Wall of Receipts' from federal contracts, grants and leases and found significant problems with the accuracy, methodology and transparency behind some of the figures.

Musk initially said DOGE could cut as much as $2 trillion (£1.49 trillion) from federal spending, before later publicly lowering his expectations. DOGE's website ultimately reported an estimated $215 billion (£160 billion) in overall savings, covering contract and lease cancellations, grants, workforce reductions, regulatory changes and several other categories. The GAO audit examined the roughly $110 billion represented by contracts, grants and leases on the Wall of Receipts, rather than DOGE's entire $215 billion estimate.

Ghost Contracts and Inflated Figures

The GAO's findings identified numerous discrepancies. DOGE's Wall of Receipts listed more than 13,000 contract terminations, yet auditors found that contracts representing $27.4 billion (£20.4 billion) in reported savings had not actually been terminated as described.

The watchdog also found that DOGE took credit for some lease terminations that were already underway before the initiative was established. Of the 264 lease terminations listed on the Wall of Receipts, 108 had already been identified for termination before DOGE was created in January 2025.

The GAO also found substantial problems with DOGE's reported contract savings. Its analysis determined that DOGE did not consistently use its publicly stated methodology when calculating savings from terminated contracts, while some contracts listed as terminated remained active or had subsequently been reinstated.

The picture was similarly unclear for grants. For 96% of the savings DOGE attributed to grant terminations, the GAO said the Wall of Receipts did not contain enough information to verify the methodology used to calculate those savings.

That distinction is important. The finding does not mean the GAO determined that 96% of the grant savings were false. Rather, auditors said DOGE had not provided sufficient information for them to verify how those savings were calculated.

One procurement expert previously compared DOGE's approach to cancelling a credit card with a $20,000 (£14,900) limit and claiming the entire limit as savings, illustrating how potential future spending can differ significantly from money the government would otherwise have actually spent.

Methodology Questions and Transparency Gaps

The report also highlighted DOGE's failure to consistently follow its stated methodology. GAO found that only about 27.5% of reported contract savings were calculated using the methodology DOGE had publicly described.

The watchdog said the Wall of Receipts did not adequately disclose those limitations, making it difficult for the public to assess the reliability of its figures. GAO also said DOGE did not respond to its requests for information about some of the identified data problems.

GAO's formal recommendation was straightforward: the Executive Office of the President should ensure the Wall of Receipts clearly discloses known data limitations and provides sufficient information for users to understand how its savings estimates were calculated.

DOGE's temporary organisation reached its scheduled end date on 4 July 2026. Its savings page, last updated on 1 January, continues to display an estimated $215 billion (£160 billion) in overall savings. The website says that figure combines savings from asset sales, contract and lease cancellations and renegotiations, grants, workforce reductions, regulatory changes and other measures.

The political response has divided largely along partisan lines. Critics, including Democratic lawmakers who requested the GAO review, have cited the findings as evidence that DOGE overstated its achievements. Supporters have argued that the initiative nevertheless identified waste and reduced federal spending.

What the audit establishes more clearly is that significant portions of the roughly $110 billion (£82 billion) listed for contracts, grants and leases cannot be treated as independently verified savings based on the information DOGE publicly provided.

Some contracts credited as terminated remained active, some leases were already scheduled for cancellation and much of the grant data lacked enough information for auditors to verify the methodology behind the reported savings.

The GAO did not conclude that DOGE produced no savings, nor did it determine that only 4% of the $110 billion was legitimate. Instead, its findings show that DOGE's public accounting contained significant errors, unsupported calculations and transparency problems that make the true savings from those actions difficult to determine.