Elon Musk's DOGE Failed in Its Mission of Reducing Federal Spending, Savings Claimed 'Were Largely Incorrect'

Elon Musk spearheaded the ambitious initiative called the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). DOGE had been giving updates on its mission through its website, with real-time corporate-style reporting before it was disbanded in November 2025. The initiative, which began earlier this year, claimed success, but a new report from the New York Times suggested otherwise.

The analysis claimed DOGE's 'biggest claims were largely incorrect' and based on the financial audits, its impact was negligible because when DOGE was still in operation, 'the federal spending did not go down at all.'

Discrepancies and Inaccurate Claims

When Musk led DOGE, they promised to reduce federal spending by £750 billion ($1 trillion) before October. However, The New York Times' analysis revealed that DOGE not only failed to meet its mission; it did not work at all.

A rigorous analysis of the figures presented has revealed that many of the touted savings were based on flawed logic or double-counting. Critics and fiscal experts have pointed out that the 'wall of receipts' frequently cited by Musk included expenditures that were either legally mandated or already slated for reduction.

In reality, federal spending increased during DOGE's eight-month tenure, contradicting the 'chainsaw massacre' narrative Musk put on at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) in February 2025. At the event, the SpaceX CEO took the stage with a red metallic chainsaw, a gift he received from Argentine President Javier Milei. He waved the chainsaw and proclaimed, 'This is the chainsaw for bureaucracy' as the crowd cheered.

The claims that billions had been saved were largely incorrect, as the identified cuts often failed to materialise in actual treasury reports.

In its website updates, DOGE claimed estimated savings of £160 billion ($214 billion) from a combination of asset sales, contract/lease cancellations and renegotiations, fraud and improper payment deletions, grant cancellations, interest savings, programmatic changes, regulatory savings, and workforce reductions.

Economists noted that the advisory body lacked the statutory authority to unilaterally cancel spending, meaning most of their recommendations remained purely theoretical. The gap between the website updates and the reality of the federal ledger has led to accusations of fiscal performance art rather than genuine reform.

DOGE's Mission

The original mission of the department, as outlined on its official website, was to 'provide advice and guidance from outside of Government' to drive large-scale structural reform. Musk and entrepreneur Vivek Ramaswamy aimed to apply an entrepreneurial approach to the public sector, targeting £1.58 trillion ($2 trillion) in potential savings.

DOGE's website served as a hub for public transparency, encouraging citizens to report perceived waste directly to the team. The approach aims to bypass traditional bureaucratic hurdles and to promote public participation.

Unfortunately, the lack of a formal legislative framework held back actual implementation, which required congressional cooperation. DOGE was reportedly just like a public relations campaign. While its goal was great, DOGE failed to materialise it.

Elon Musk Says DOGE Was 'Somewhat Successful'

Billionaire Elon Musk shared his thoughts about DOGE after it was disbanded in an interview with conservative influencer Katie Miller, who also served as DOGE's spokesperson earlier this month. According to the TESLA CEO, the organisation he founded was 'somewhat successful.'

'We were a little bit successful. We were somewhat successful,' Musk told Miller (via AP News).

However, when asked if he would do it all over again, the businessman and entrepreneur turned dissident. 'I don't think so,' Musk said, explaining that instead of focusing his energy on DOGE, he would rather build or work on his businesses.

Musk previously compared DOGE to saving baby pandas. According to him, it was challenging to cut federal spending because the agencies they target usually evoke public sympathy to hide their illicit activities.