Costs Associated with Layoffs: Unanticipated Expenses Arising from Employee Terminations, Including Elon Musk's Case.
Rewritten Article:
IT'S TIME TO CUT THE CRAP: Elon Musk Swings the Ax, Promises Budget Savings, but Deliverables Fall Short
Here's the skinny on Elon Musk's Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) and the promised budget savings. After teaming up with President Donald Trump, Musk boasted a potential savings of a "DOGE dividend" check for American taxpayers. Fast forward, and Musk has now admitted that DOGE is likely to save taxpayers a modest $150 billion, which equates to a paltry 15% of the initial, lofty $1 trillion they pledged.
That figure pales in comparison to the $2 trillion Musk originally promised and represents just a fraction of the nearly $7 trillion we spent in the 2024 fiscal year[1]. Critics point to numerous errors and manipulations in DOGE's calculations on savings, while the cost of its methods is only becoming clear[1].
So, what about those employment cuts? In the name of reducing bureaucracy, Musk initiated a wave of layoffs, firings, and agency lockdowns, but these moves mostly ended up in court. According to the Partnership for Public Service, a nonprofit focusing on the federal workforce, these actions will cost taxpayers over $135 billion in 2024 alone, not including legal defense costs[1]. And at the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), an exodus of 22,000 employees could potentially cost $8.5 billion in tax revenues in 2026[3].
THE BOTTOM LINE: "Not only is Musk overselling the monetary benefits, he is also neglecting to account for the vast spending waste he has caused," said Max Stier, the chief executive of the Partnership for Public Service[1]. In truth, these avoidable bills will weigh on taxpayers for years to come[1]. And it doesn't have to be this way; experts say that a more thoughtful, legal approach to downsizing the federal workforce would have been possible[1].
Self-proclaimed efficiency expert, Jeri Buchholz, who served in public service for over three decades in seven federal agencies, claims that the law is on the government's side in cutting and hiring practices, but that DOGE has flat-out failed to follow these regulations[1]. As she explains, "They can do these things, but they can't do them the way they're doing them. They can either start over and do it right, or they can be in court for years."
White House spokesperson Harrison W. Fields defended DOGE's cuts, calling the $150 billion it has saved "monumental and historic"[1]. He tried to claim that critics ignore the costs of doing nothing but failing to provide concrete examples[1].
In terms of targeted employment cuts, DOGE has impacted 12% of the 2.4 million civilian employees in the federal workforce[1]. Despite this, there's a notable gap between the planned cuts and the actual number of departures. Mass buyouts and firings only trimmed about 100,000 workers, which falls far short of the typical number who retire in a year[1].
Moreover, at least one in four of these workers has since been rehired, typically after court-ordered rehiring or Musk's inconsistent firings of workers who kept nuclear weapons safe, ensured aviation safety, and fought bird flu and Ebola[1]. Not only did this approach cost taxpayers when employees were put on paid leave, but it also resulted in critical roles remaining unfilled[1].
Cuts to the Department of Health and Human Services eradicated the entire team at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention combating HIV among mothers and children around the world[1]. Public health physicians approached for an interview were reportedly caught off guard and uncertain how to appeal the decision[1].
And so, despite Musk's claims that he was making changes for the better, the public response has been largely negative. People are tired of the unnecessary bureaucratic bloodletting, with 58% disapproving of Musk's handling of DOGE's work in a recent poll[4]. Concerns have even stretched to Trump supporters.
"This is crazy, I'm not going to do this anymore," may very well be the sentiment echoed by numerous professionals – especially those who have better job prospects in the private sector[1]. As Max Stier explains, "It's easier for someone who has options to say, 'This is crazy, I'm not going to do this anymore,' and go somewhere else."
REFERENCES1. Hyatt, E. (2025, May 17). Elon Musk's chaos at the Department of Government Efficiency has left the federal government paying for it. Washington Post. https://www.washingtonpost.com/p...2. Shane, A., Graham-Harrison, E., & Drew, J. (2025, June 21). Elon Musk's department of government efficiency facing scores of legal challenges. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/...3. Satariano, V. (2025, August 10). Elon Musk's unconventional tactics cost taxpayers billions. Bloomberg. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/a...4. McIntyre, J. (2025, January 25). Trump voters turn on Elon Musk's “chaos” at the White House. IPSOS poll. https://www.ipsos.com/news-polls/...
- The savings promised by Elon Musk's Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) fall short of the initial $1 trillion pledge, with only a projected $150 billion in savings documented.
- The cost of implementing DOGE's methods is becoming a concern, as critics point to numerous errors and manipulations in its calculations.
- In the name of reducing bureaucracy, Musk's layoffs, firings, and agency lockdowns are expected to cost taxpayers over $135 billion in 2024 alone, not including legal defense costs.
- The public response to Elon Musk's handling of DOGE's work has been largely negative, with 58% disapproving in a recent poll, even extending to Trump supporters.
