https://www.nytimes.com/2025/02/21/upshot/doge-musk-trump-errors.html

Skip to contentSkip to site index
 
 
Today's Paper
 

Musk's Influence

  * Access to Citizens' Data
  * Who Runs DOGE?
  * Musk's Secretive Unit
  * A Major Accounting Error
  * Federal Worker Cuts

Advertisement

SKIP ADVERTISEMENT
You have a preview view of this article while we are checking your
access. When we have confirmed access, the full article content will
load.

DOGE's Only Public Ledger Is Riddled With Mistakes

The figures from Elon Musk's team of outsiders represent billions in
government cuts. They are also full of accounting errors, outdated
data and other miscalculations.

  * Share full article
  * 
  * 
  * 786
    786

[00up-elon1-vtwg-articleLarge-v2]
Elon Musk has been a central figure in the first month of the Trump
administration.Credit...Eric Lee/The New York Times
Aatish BhatiaEmily BadgerDavid A. FahrentholdJosh KatzMargot
Sanger-KatzEthan Singer

By Aatish BhatiaEmily BadgerDavid A. FahrentholdJosh KatzMargot
Sanger-Katz and Ethan Singer

The reporters reviewed hundreds of federal contracts, interviewed
contracting experts and spoke to recipients of canceled contracts.

  * Published Feb. 21, 2025Updated Feb. 22, 2025, 4:17 p.m. ET

Elon Musk and his Department of Government Efficiency say they have
saved the federal government $55 billion through staff reductions,
lease cancellations and a long list of terminated contracts published
online this week as a "wall of receipts."

President Trump has been celebrating the published savings, even
musing about a proposal to mail checks to all Americans to reimburse
them with a "DOGE dividend."

But the math that could back up those checks is marred with
accounting errors, incorrect assumptions, outdated data and other
mistakes, according to a New York Times analysis of all the contracts
listed. While the DOGE team has surely cut some number of billions of
dollars, its slapdash accounting adds to a pattern of recklessness by
the group, which has recently gained access to sensitive government
payment systems.

Some contracts the group claims credit for were double- or
triple-counted. Another initially contained an error that inflated
the totals by billions of dollars. In at least one instance, the
group claimed an entire contract had been canceled when only part of
the work had been halted. In others, contracts the group said it had
closed were actually ended under the Biden administration.

The canceled contracts listed on the website make up a small part of
the $55 billion total that the group estimated it had found so far.
It was not possible to independently verify that number or other
totals on the site with the evidence provided. A senior White House
official described how the office made its calculations on individual
contracts, but did not respond to numerous questions about other
aspects of the group's accounting. But it is clear that every dollar
the website claims credit for is not necessarily a dollar the federal
government would have spent -- or one that can now be returned to the
public.

Image
A screenshot of the DOGE site's "wall of receipts" on Friday.

Share of minority-owned businesses

Among contracts DOGE claims it canceled 26%
Among all federal contracts             12%

Source: DOGE, Federal Procurement Data System

DOGE figures reflect 1,123 contracts listed on its website on Feb. 21
that could be linked to a federal contract. Federal contract figures
are based on an analysis by Deltek.

DIVERSITY, EQUITY, INCLUSION AND ACCESSIBILITY (DEIA) PROFESSIONAL
SUPPORT SERVICES

Contract #70RSAT23FR0000139 awarded by DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY to THE MILLENNIUM GROUP INTERNATIONAL, LLC
$0 Obligated spending
$5,400,000 Savings

Take this contract for D.E.I. services for the Department of Homeland
Security. DOGE says canceling it saved $5.4 million.

Take this contract for D.E.I. services for the Department of Homeland
Security. DOGE says canceling it saved $5.4 million.

To arrive at this figure, it started with the contract's total
potential value: around $7.5 million.

To arrive at this figure, it started with the contract's total
potential value: around $7.5 million.

Then it subtracted the amount that appears to have already been
spent.

Then it subtracted the amount that appears to have already been
spent.

At first glance, this seems straightforward ...

At first glance, this seems straightforward ...

Figures are rounded.

We are having trouble retrieving the article content.

Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.

---------------------------------------------------------------------

Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in
Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe
 for all of The Times.

---------------------------------------------------------------------

Thank you for your patience while we verify access.

Already a subscriber? Log in.

Want all of The Times? Subscribe.

Advertisement

SKIP ADVERTISEMENT

Site Index

Site Information Navigation

  * (c) 2025 The New York Times Company

  * NYTCo
  * Contact Us
  * Accessibility
  * Work with us
  * Advertise
  * T Brand Studio
  * Your Ad Choices
  * Privacy Policy
  * Terms of Service
  * Terms of Sale
  * Site Map
  * Canada
  * International
  * Help
  * Subscriptions

  * Manage Privacy Preferences