A significant number of federal contracts that the Trump administration claimed would save taxpayer money through cancellation are now projected to bring no financial benefits, according to data from the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), led by Elon Musk.
Despite bold claims of cutting unnecessary spending, the administration’s own numbers suggest that many of these terminations are purely symbolic.
Over One-Third of Cancellations Offer No Savings
The DOGE recently released a list of 1,125 canceled federal contracts across various government agencies. However, their own “Wall of Receipts” data shows that:
- 417 contracts—over one-third of the total—are expected to generate no cost savings.
- The total value of these contracts amounts to $478 million.
In many cases, these cancellations failed to save money because the funds had already been legally obligated, meaning the government was required to pay for goods or services that were either already delivered or underway.
Charles Tiefer, a retired law professor from the University of Baltimore and an expert on government contracting, criticized the effort:
“It’s like confiscating used ammunition after it’s been shot when there’s nothing left in it. It doesn’t accomplish any policy objective.”
Why Are These Contracts Being Canceled?
According to administration officials, canceling these contracts—regardless of financial outcome—was a way to eliminate “potential dead weight.” However, many of the canceled agreements had already fulfilled their intended purposes or were too far along to reverse payments.
Some examples of canceled contracts include:
- Subscriptions to news services such as The Associated Press and Politico.
- Research studies, software purchases, and training programs that had already been paid for or completed.
- Contracts for modernizing government systems, which ironically conflicts with the DOGE’s mission to improve efficiency.
An anonymous official defended the cancellations, arguing they were necessary to eliminate waste, even if they didn’t result in immediate savings.
Key Examples of Ineffective Cancellations
The cancellations spanned across multiple agencies, including contracts that had already been fulfilled or fully paid:
- $567,809 contract with a furniture company for the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), which had already committed the full amount.
- $145,549 cleaning contract for the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), awarded to a Native American-owned business based in Michigan.
- $249,600 contract for consulting services that helped the Department of Transportation transition between administrations.
One of the most significant cancellations involved a $13.6 million contract with Deloitte Consulting LLP aimed at restructuring the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)—an effort that could have enhanced government response to future pandemics.
Despite DOGE’s intention to streamline spending, canceling such modernization efforts could ultimately harm the efficiency and preparedness of federal agencies.
Experts Question Cost-Saving Claims
Although DOGE claims that canceling contracts will save more than $7 billion overall, independent experts have raised concerns about these figures being overinflated.
Charles Tiefer argued that a more effective approach would involve:
- Collaborating with agency contracting officers and inspectors general to identify genuine inefficiencies.
- Avoiding the “slash-and-burn” method, which could negatively affect the performance and modernization of government agencies.
“It’s too late for the government to change its mind on many of these contracts and walk away from its payment obligation,” Tiefer noted.
