President-elect Donald Trump is set to launch the new Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), which he introduced during a pre-election interview on billionaire Elon Musk’s social media platform, X.
Musk and former Republican presidential candidate Vivek Ramaswamy will co-chair the effort, which aims to slash $2 trillion from the roughly $6.75 trillion federal budget, hack through a labyrinth of executive branch regulations, and reform or remove entire federal agencies.
They would also seek to sharply reduce the number of government bureaucrats “proportionate to the number of federal regulations that are nullified,” the duo wrote in a Nov. 20 Wall Street Journal op-ed.
“Together, these two wonderful Americans will pave the way for my administration to dismantle government bureaucracy, slash excess regulations, cut wasteful expenditures, and restructure federal agencies,” Trump wrote in a statement.
“It will become, potentially, ‘The Manhattan Project’ of our time. Republican politicians have dreamed about the objectives of ‘DOGE’ for a very long time.”
How they might accomplish that effort, however, is unclear, experts told The Epoch Times. Especially because the department—which Trump said will serve in an advisory capacity to the White House and the Office of Management and Budget (OMB)—may encounter roadblocks in its mandate to “drive large-scale structural reform.”
Here is a breakdown of what the new efficiency department is, what its goals are, and what to expect from the project moving forward.
The Scope of DOGE
Trump said that DOGE will make “changes to the federal bureaucracy with an eye on efficiency” to “drive out the massive waste and fraud” in the federal government’s multi-trillion dollar annual spending.
Although it has the word “department” in its name, DOGE is not a federal agency like the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO), which audits the federal government for Congress.
“Trump has made clear that DOGE is an advisory board operating outside the federal government,” Jordan Haring, the director of fiscal policy at the American Action Forum, told The Epoch Times. “Thus, unlike federal agencies, it does not need to be formally enacted through an act of Congress.”
The department, Haring said, would work to “identify inefficiencies and waste within the federal government” like the GAO, but the latter works at the request of congressional committees and is mandated by public laws and committee reports.
Because of its goal of providing congressional oversight, the GAO is more of an extension of the legislative branch, while DOGE will largely advise the executive.
Exactly what DOGE will be doing in its day-to-day operations is still unclear, Haring said, although Trump has suggested it will operate outside the federal government while remaining under his authority.
“DOGE could end up being nothing more than a glorified advisory board or an outside entity with significant influence,” Haring added.
Susan Dudley, senior scholar and founder of the George Washington University Regulatory Studies Center, told The Epoch Times that there could be a direct collaboration between DOGE and the OMB’s Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, which reviews and oversees executive branch regulations.
“[DOGE] couldn’t eliminate rules or create procedural changes itself, but could make recommendations that the president could direct agencies to pursue. I think the remit should include recommendations to Congress,” Dudley said.
“It’s not clear how it would work. Presidents often have outsiders that they consult, of course, but this sounds more formal.”
Bold Plans for DOGE
After the initial announcement, Musk moved quickly to create an X account for DOGE.
Through the account, the department began a recruitment drive, calling for “super high-IQ small-government revolutionaries” who are willing to work more than 80 hours per week on “unglamorous cost-cutting.”
Ramaswamy went as far as calling their mission a “legal mandate,” citing recent rulings from the U.S. Supreme Court, including West Virginia v. EPA (2022), which determined that federal agencies must seek “clear congressional authorization” before deciding major questions of political and economic significance, and Loper Bright v. Raimondo (2024), which overruled the principle that courts defer to agencies’ reasonable interpretations of ambiguity in laws.
To slash spending, Musk plans to use artificial intelligence and crowd-sourcing to find waste, abuse, and fraud in the federal government’s expenditures. That could include outright eliminating certain federal agencies, Ramaswamy said in a recent interview with Fox News.
“We expect mass reductions in force in areas of the federal government that are bloated,” he added.
There are a number of spending-cut options already on the table. In 2023, federal agencies self-reported roughly $236 billion in improper payments that either shouldn’t have been issued, were made in the incorrect amount, or did not have proper supporting documentation, according to the GAO.
Between the years of 2004 and 2022, that number rose to roughly $2.9 trillion in improper spending, according to a report from Open The Books.
Ramaswamy indicated in a post on X that, under President Joe Biden, the Department of Health and Human Services vastly increased spending for diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs, amounting to an annual cost of $38.7 million to employ 294 DEI staffers, according to another report from Open The Books. The report located 829 instances of the word “equity” in the agency’s 2025 budget request to Congress.
RealClear Investigations found that the federal government had mistakenly paid $1.3 billion to dead people in fiscal year 2023 alone, citing data from the OMB.
But DOGE may face headwinds with some of its more ambitious spending-cut plans, as reducing key portions of the federal budget could draw ire from both sides of the political aisle. Social Security was a significant chunk—21 percent, or $1.4 trillion—of the annual federal budget in 2023, according to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.
Trump promised this year that he would protect Social Security and Medicare, and he even suggested that there be no more taxes on benefits, which could cost the government even more.
The federal government spent another $1.6 trillion on health insurance programs in 2023, including Medicare, Medicaid, the Children’s Health Insurance Program, and Affordable Care Act subsidies. This was 24 percent of the federal budget that year.
Another 8 percent ($545 billion) of the 2023 federal budget was used for economic security programs, including the Earned Income Tax Credit, Child Tax Credit, Supplemental Security Income for low-income Americans who are disabled or older than 65, and food stamps—all programs that could be last in line for Trump-approved spending cuts, based on his campaign promises this year.
Lastly, defense spending, which was 13 percent of the 2023 budget ($820 billion), is also unlikely to be cut, as Republicans historically favor increases to the military budget. Musk and Ramaswamy, however, wrote in their co-authored op-ed that they may target the Pentagon’s budget after it failed its seventh straight audit.
There’s also the concern that some of Trump’s other campaign promises, including no tax on tips for hospitality workers and sweeping tariffs on foreign imports, could balloon the federal debt by between $1.65 trillion and $15.55 trillion between 2026 and 2035, according to the bipartisan Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget.
Those effects could vary widely depending on exactly what Trump prioritizes in his economic agenda throughout the next four years, but any increases to the debt could potentially stymie some of DOGE’s accomplishments.
DOGE also has to contend with Congress, which the Constitution grants the power of the nation’s purse. Congress would likely need to approve any changes to federal spending or the dissolution of certain agencies.
Trump, however, said during the 2024 Republican primary that he would use a concept called impoundment to seize control of spending from the legislative branch. Impoundment occurs when the president declines to spend money appropriated by Congress. After Congress rebuked former President Richard Nixon for refusing to spend funds for the Clean Water Act of 1972, it passed the Impoundment Control Act of 1974 and simultaneously established the Congressional Budget Office.
Regulatory Overhaul
The new government efficiency project is also poised to target regulations.
“By all measures, the government regulatory apparatus has been growing for decades, regardless of the party in office, and the last four years have been especially active,” Dudley wrote for Forbes.
While Musk had highlighted the sprawling array of government regulations when first formulating DOGE with Trump, Dudley said that efforts to pull back or repeal some of those rules will likely meet with resistance from the agencies themselves and their employees, “who naturally believe that their activities—whether requiring companies’ financial statements to report climate risk, constraining private contractual agreements, or eliminating gas stoves—are essential.”
She recommends the formation of a bipartisan commission including key senators and representatives who have championed regulatory reform to “achieve lasting results.” That commission could make recommendations to Congress for legislative changes while targeting specific regulations and programs that need reforms.
DOGE could also solicit public comments from “those with real experience on what works and what doesn’t,” but resistance to change will remain among those in the programs and agencies that institute the targeted rules and regulations.
That would involve relying on “cognizant agencies to develop a new rulemaking and support it with a record that can stand up in court,” Dudley told The Epoch Times.
“This takes a year or more even if agencies are enthusiastic, which they are unlikely to be,“ she said. ”Even if a new rulemaking makes its way through the process … it will be subject to litigation by parties that preferred the prior interpretation.”
Others are concerned about granting Musk and Ramaswamy so much authority over rolling back government regulations.
“The purpose of government regulations is to protect the American people,” Lisa Gilbert, the co-president of progressive consumer rights advocacy group Public Citizen, wrote in a statement.
“We all depend on these regulations to protect our air, water, workers, children’s safety, and so much more. ‘Cutting red tape’ is shorthand for getting rid of the safeguards that protect us in order to benefit corporate interests.”
Final Roadblocks
Some economic experts are less enthusiastic about DOGE and Musk’s role at the forefront of the project, which could give the tech CEO and billionaire a considerable influence on the same federal government that issues critical contracts and subsidies to his companies, SpaceX and Tesla, while also regulating his social platform through the Federal Communications Commission.
“Handing the keys of government to those looking to profit from our government is extremely dangerous and a massive conflict of interest,” Zach Moller, the economic program director at Third Way, a center-left think tank, wrote in a statement.
Vikramaditya Khanna, a law professor at the University of Michigan, said Musk leading DOGE may not necessarily present a conflict of interest if he acts as an adviser rather than a government employee, and a president can potentially waive conflict of interest rules. Khanna specializes in corporate law and government contracts.
Regardless, Moller said he fears that DOGE will lead to “more waste … and rampant abuse of political power.”
He added that although Musk is a “brilliant entrepreneur and a tech visionary,” the CEO and billionaire could “use his newfound government powers to throw a lifeline to his teetering companies.”
Moller said fraud in federal spending is an important issue, and much can be accomplished by going after those who bilk federal agencies.
The Epoch Times contacted DOGE via X and Tesla’s press office for comment from Musk.