Trump 2.0: A First Look at the Department of Government Efficiency

The broad mission of DOGE, combined with the fact that it is structured to operate outside of the federal regulatory state, has drawn much speculation about its eventual impact on the Executive Branch and U.S. policy. DOGE leaders have made sweeping promises about its mission and potency, writing in a Wall Street Journal op-ed that their entity would “cut the federal government down to size.” But the details of how DOGE will interact with the federal agencies, their legal authorities and options to affect major change, and the role of Congress in these proposals is not clear.

The following analysis examines what we know about DOGE so far and provides a high-level overview of the implications for federal operations, regulated entities and industry.

What Is DOGE?
Despite its name, DOGE is not an official federal agency or commission that requires congressional authorization. Rather, it is intended to serve as an advisory or consulting organization which, empowered by Trump, provides recommendations or strategies for government leaders to implement.

DOGE will be led by Musk, the CEO of Tesla, SpaceX and X, and Ramaswamy, the former presidential candidate and founder of Roivant Sciences, who both supported Trump during the presidential campaign. DOGE is expected to be staffed by individuals who share a “small government” ideology.

What Does DOGE Plan to Do?
In explaining their mission in the Wall Street Journal op-ed, Musk and Ramaswamy stated that they will focus on three major kinds of reforms: 1) regulatory rescissions, 2) administrative reductions and 3) cost savings. We expect DOGE to focus on:

• Identifying existing federal regulations that, as DOGE argues, go beyond congressional authorizations;
• Promoting a culling of the federal workforce by undertaking “reductions in force” that circumvent federal civil service protections, relocating federal agencies outside Washington, DC, and requiring employees to come to the office five days per week; and
• Cutting federal budget outlays by refraining from spending appropriated funds, ending federal spending for programs that are not currently authorized by Congress, and highlighting perceived “waste” and “fraud” within federal programs, particularly with respect to government contracts.

This work will ostensibly be based on several recent Supreme Court cases, as well as a belief that the Supreme Court will approve many presidential actions challenged in the judiciary.

What Powers Will DOGE Have?
DOGE will not have official government powers. As an autonomous entity, DOGE itself does not have authorities to issue rules, rescind regulations, terminate federal employees or enforce federal laws. But, behind the scenes, DOGE is expected to wield significant influence.

According to its leaders, DOGE will identify issues and make recommendations to the White House, agency leaders and Congress for action. In particular, DOGE leaders say they will work closely with the existing Office of Management and Budget, the President’s office charged with budget development, oversight of agency performance and financial management, and coordination of federal regulations. It is expected that the issues that DOGE draws attention to will receive intense focus by government leaders.

Further, the House Oversight and Accountability Committee, which remains under Republican control, announced that it intends to create a subcommittee that would work directly with DOGE. Presumably, this coordination would serve as a channel for DOGE to make recommendations that result in congressional investigations and/or legislative proposals.

Limitations and Concerns
During the presidential transition, DOGE’s stated mission hit all the favorite “buzzwords” of small-government champions. However, it is not clear what the DOGE output will comprise.

DOGE is likely to have the greatest impact in making recommendations to suspend or rescind federal regulations. Separate from the work of DOGE, President-elect Trump is expected to oversee a significant deregulatory agenda, including by reimposing rules from his first presidency where each new regulation promulgated must be accompanied by the removal of existing regulations. This deregulatory agenda may include defunding or restricting resources to the Environmental Protection Agency and rolling back Biden Administration priorities, like fuel efficiency standards and regulation of power plant emissions. DOGE proposals that align with the existing deregulatory efforts are likely to be welcomed and implemented, especially since President-elect Trump has promised to test the bounds of authority to direct federal agency regulatory changes with little input from Congress.

DOGE leaders have also proposed a rather unprecedented strategy. Specifically, they have enumerated plans to identify regulations that potentially run afoul of two recent Supreme Court decisions: West Virginia v. Environmental Protection Agency (which holds that agencies do not have the authority to issue regulations dealing with “major” economic or policy questions unless Congress specifically authorizes them to do so) and Loper Bright v. Raimondo (overturning the long-standing Chevron decision holding that federal courts must defer to an agency’s interpretation of statutes containing ambiguous or no authorizing language related to the issue at hand). Musk and Ramaswamy say that, once they identify regulations that purportedly violate the rulings, they will present a list of such regulations to President Trump, who may then, via executive order, pause their enforcement and commence a process to rescind them. It is likely that such efforts will be challenged in court.

However, with respect to cost-cutting, DOGE may face more challenges. The U.S. federal budget is more than $6 trillion, with the majority of that spending directed to entitlement programs like Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid. These programs are popular, and proposals to limit them would surely face fierce political pushback. Moreover, with respect to federal discretionary spending, Trump Administration efforts to refuse to spend appropriated funds on government programs will also likely face legal challenge under the Impoundment Control Act, though the DOGE leaders have expressed confidence that the current Supreme Court will support such efforts.

Congress also plays a significant role in federal spending, by authorizing and ultimately appropriating funds for federal agencies and federal programs. While the Republican-controlled Congress will very likely work in lockstep with the Trump White House, it is equally likely that Republican members of Congress will be uncomfortable with delayed payments and spending cuts to programs favored by constituents. In particular, government contractors are likely to push back against proposals from DOGE leaders to temporarily suspend payments to contractors while large-scale audits are conducted. Such suspensions could run afoul of the Prompt Payment Act of 1982 and, depending on the duration and the amount of nonpayment, may cause the government to be in material breach of their contracts. Members of Congress may dislike their constituents struggling to meet payroll and stay afloat during the envisioned audits. Similarly, White House efforts to curtail federal procurement characterized (fairly or unfairly) as wasteful may find friends in Congress and in the public to ensure continuing federal funding supporting their contracts.

Considerations for Industry
Still, even with those obstacles, DOGE will likely be influential in the new Trump Administration. To that end, companies that believe they could be impacted (for better or worse) by DOGE recommendations may consider the following precautions:

• Identify ways to highlight regulations that have negative effects on your business to DOGE or its advocates in Congress;
• Identify ways that your technology solutions could be used by the federal government to create greater efficiencies;
• Take cues from previous budget audits and identify how supposedly misspent funds could be better used by federal agencies;
• If you are a government contractor who believes that your contract could be cast as wasteful, be proactive in educating Congress and the White House about its benefits, and prepare to support a potential future claim by ensuring that you have systems in place to segregate and track the costs you incur due to contract changes or termination; and
• If action by DOGE does not seem imminent with respect to burdensome regulations, consider bringing litigation citing West Virginia or Loper Bright.

Alternatively, if DOGE targets regulations that are beneficial to your business, organizations should also consider working with Congress to make clear through legislative vehicles (including statutory or report language, statements from congressional committees or even individual member statements) that the regulation in question is indeed consistent with congressional intent.

It is fair to say that much of what will happen during President-elect Trump’s second term will be unique and disruptive to “normal” Washington routines, and nothing exemplifies that more than the planned use of DOGE. Companies would be wise to take into consideration the potential outsized impact of DOGE as they develop public policy plans for the new administration.