Elon Musk and President Trump promised significant taxpayer savings through the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), but the actual savings are far less than anticipated, with only $150 billion saved against a promised $1 trillion. The rapid and chaotic implementation of workforce cuts has led to substantial unintended costs, including $135 billion due to firings, re-hirings, and legal expenses. Many of the cuts were mishandled, leading to illegal firings and rehirings, which exacerbated costs and inefficiencies. The cuts have weakened critical government functions, such as the Internal Revenue Service and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The approach has drawn widespread criticism for its lack of planning and legal adherence, further straining the government's ability to function effectively and recruit new talent.

Musk and Trump's Department of Government Efficiency aimed to save $150 billion, a fraction of the $1 trillion originally promised, with the savings claims being criticized for inaccuracies and misrepresentations.

The chaotic firings and re-hirings have resulted in a $135 billion cost to taxpayers, not accounting for the additional legal costs of defending these actions in court. This includes an estimated $8.5 billion revenue loss at the IRS due to employee departures.

A significant number of DOGE's workforce reductions were reversed after courts ruled them illegal, leading to rehirings and additional financial burdens on taxpayers, as many employees were placed on paid leave.

Key government functions have been disrupted by the firings, including an exodus at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the National Nuclear Security Administration, impacting public health and national security.

The strategy of rapid workforce reductions emulated Musk's approach at Twitter, ignoring legal frameworks and leading to court challenges, which experts argue could have been avoided with more deliberate planning.

The administration's approach has faced public disapproval, including among Trump supporters, with a significant percentage of the public expressing discontent with Musk's handling of the situation.

The firings have been criticized for targeting new, probationary employees and crucial positions without regard to performance, undermining future recruitment efforts and losing substantial investments in training and hiring.