The Government Accountability Office (GAO), Congress’ investigative arm, recently released a report highlighting the lack of transparency and inconsistent data regarding the U.S. Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE)’s contract, grant, and lease terminations.

On January 20, 2026, Executive Order 14158 established DOGE within the Executive Office of the President. Originally led by Elon Musk and staffed with personnel hand-picked from outside of the normal merit-based civil service, DOGE was heralded as a way to quickly cut taxpayer costs.

On July 4, 2026, the office was dissolved. During this time, in response to direction from the President, agency personnel were terminated, and federal agencies cancelled or modified thousands of contracts, grants, and leases. As part of this work, DOGE developed a page on its public website, referred to as the “Wall of Receipts,” which listed contracts, grants, and leases that have been terminated as well as their associated cost savings estimates. DOGE released its first estimate of savings claims in February 2025 and continued to update the Wall of Receipts until January 1, 2026. It remains live as of July 7, 2026.

Currently, the Wall of Receipts reports savings of $110 billion from terminated contracts, grants, and leases and an additional $105 billion in savings from other categories (programmatic changes, regulatory savings, workforce reductions, etc.). When the Wall of Receipts first debuted, Taxpayers for Common Sense cast doubt on the veracity of the claimed savings, noting errors, double counting, over-estimates, misrepresentations, falsehoods and a lack of understanding how federal budgeting and spending works.

The GAO’s report found that the errors on DOGE’s Wall of Receipts were not corrected. Claimed savings continued to be riddled with inconsistencies and lacked transparency, including that DOGE:

• Applied inconsistent methodology in its cost savings calculations
• Overstated savings by failing to account for associated costs of terminations
• Reported incorrect data (e.g. listed contracts, grants, and leases that were either terminated before DOGE was enacted or were never fully terminated)
• Reported data before it was finalized, resulting in a later reduction in the number of terminations and associated costs savings
• Reported top-line cost savings that did not match the sum of listed savings
• Failed to provide the information necessary to confirm the number of terminations and/or their associated cost savings

Contract Terminations 

DOGE reports 13,476 contracts as terminated with associated saving of $61 billion.

Insufficient Data

GAO found that the Wall of Receipts did not include identifying information, such as contract numbers, for 28 percent of the contracts, including all the contracts at the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) and 245 contracts at other agencies. Importantly, this lack of data kept GAO could not link the contracts to the Federal Procurement Data System, which is the official database where the U.S. government tracks federal contract awards above $10,000.

Inconsistent Methodology

To calculate the cost savings estimates, DOGE calculated the difference between the contract’s total value and the amount currently obligated to the contract. However, DOGE did not consistently use its stated methodology. The GAO report found that DOGE followed the methodology that was stated on the Wall of Receipts for just 7,710 contracts reported as terminated — which accounted for $17 billion (28 percent) of the reported savings. For 3,910 contracts — which accounted for $37 billion (61 percent) of the reported savings — DOGE used other calculations. For the remaining 1,856 contracts — which accounted for $7 billion (12 percent) of the reported savings — GAO was unable to determine what method was used to calculate the reported savings.

Overstating Savings

Even when DOGE used consistent methodology, the reported savings did not reflect the costs associated with contract terminations, thus overestimating the amount of savings gained from terminating these contracts. In some cases, work and associated costs were shifted to other contracts, constraining or eliminating potential savings. For example, DOGE reported more than $28 million in savings for reducing the work scope of an Air Force contract for financial management modernization. However, the contractor was later awarded another $27.4 million contract, without competing for it, to complete the same work.

Incorrect Data

DOGE reported all contracts on the Wall of Receipts as terminated, but the GAO’s analysis found that 2,503 contracts, representing 45% of reported savings, were not terminated. For example, DOGE reported $1.7 billion in savings for the cancellation of a Department of Defense’s Defense Health Agency contract for IT that was eventually not terminated nor reduced in scope, value, or funding. Only 43% of the savings reported by DOGE come from contracts that were completely or partially terminated. GAO was unable to determine the status of the remaining contracts because DOGE did not provide enough data to cross check the information with government databases.

Grant Terminations

DOGE reports 15,887 grants as terminated with associated saving of $49 billion.

Insufficient Data

GAO found that one out of every five grants on the Wall of Receipts reported as terminated has insufficient data­, such as the type of grant or the type of assistance the grant provide, and therefore could not be examined fully and confirmed. That 22 percent of grants made up approximately $26 billion of the DOGE reported savings.

Not only did DOGE provide insufficient data to determine which grants were compromised, but they also failed to provide sufficient information to verify that the methodology used by DOGE to calculate savings was accurate —  t­he methodology used to calculate 96 percent of DOGE-reported saving. The Wall of Receipts states the DOGE’s formula for calculating savings is the difference between the total value and the amount currently obligated, but USAspending,gov, the official source of federal spending information, does not include the total value of individual grants. Because of this, it is unknown how DOGE applied their stated methodology to determine cost savings.

Overstating Savings

Similar to contract terminations, it is unclear if the amount of reported savings will be realized. Agencies collect detailed information associated with termination activities for each grant, but this information, including closeout and settlement costs, is not clearly identified on USAspending.gov.

Lease Terminations

DOGE reports 264 leases as terminated with associated saving of $53.5 million (or $113 million).

Conflicting Data

While DOGE reports a topline of $113 million in savings for the terminated leases, the GAO found that the information on the Wall of Receipts actually summed to $53.5 million in savings.

Changing Data

GAO reports that the total number of leases DOGE reported as terminated and associated savings decreased during the time frame of their review. On March 30, 2025, DOGE reported 679 terminated leases totaling approximately $400 million in savings. However, between March 30, 2025, and October 5, 2025, 415 leases were removed from the Wall of Receipts, leaving only 264 leases as still terminated.

Counting Leases Terminated Before the Creation of DOGE

108 of the 264 leases that were identified had already being terminated before the establishment of DOGE. The estimated savings from the 108 previously terminated leases accounted for about $15 million of the total $53.5 million in savings, or about 29 percent.

Overstating Savings

DOGE also overstates the estimated savings from lease terminations by not factoring in the additional associated costs for termination including moving or relocation costs and early termination fees. At least 30 leases on the Wall of Receipts were in the “firm term” and therefore could have been subject to penalties. In at least one case, GAO found that a lease termination that was later rescinded actually led to a new rate more than $1.5 million higher per year. This led to an overstatement of saved taxpayer funds.

Conclusion

What was established as a resource to provide data and transparency to policymakers and taxpayers, DOGE’s Wall of Receipts has done the opposite. Accurate and transparent information is vital in fostering public trust between taxpayers and government. While cutting unnecessary taxpayer money spending makes sense, the spending must actually be unnecessary and the claims of savings must be made using consistent and reliable data. Self-reported government savings claims can never substitute for independently verifiable data.  Taxpayers should be skeptical of any big number, savings or otherwise, that is not backed by accessible and accurate data.

Furthermore, the reckless approach DOGE took reduced the amount of savings possible and increased taxpayer and policymaker cynicism about anti-waste and attempts to achieve greater efficiency in government. This, in turn, will set back future efforts to achieve a smart, common sense approach to eliminating waste and enacting reforms that will result in a more efficient and effective government that works for taxpayers.