GAO Audited DOGE's Wall of Receipts. The Numbers Did Not Hold Up.

A new GAO audit of DOGE's "Wall of Receipts" found that the savings claims used to justify two years of federal workforce cuts do not hold up when checked against the government's own records. The report, GAO-26-108615, was published August 6, 2026.

For the federal employees who were RIF'd, walked out on probation, or told their work was waste, the findings are worth reading carefully.

What GAO Set Out to Check

DOGE's public Wall of Receipts claimed roughly $110 billion in savings from terminated contracts, grants, and leases as of July 7, 2026. GAO asked DOGE to explain how it calculated those figures.

According to the report, the U.S. DOGE Service did not respond to GAO's requests for information or interviews. So GAO reconstructed the math itself, using the Federal Procurement Data System, USAspending, and GSA's lease records.

Contracts: $27.4 Billion on Terminations That Never Happened

DOGE listed 13,476 contracts as terminated. GAO checked them against federal procurement data and found roughly 2,503 with no termination action recorded at all — representing about $27.4 billion in claimed savings. Another 5,812 contracts, 43.2 percent of the total, reported no savings.

The clearest single example involves the Defense Health Agency. DOGE claimed $1.7 billion in savings on a DoD IT services contract. After DoD explained the work, the contract was never terminated, its scope was not cut, and no funding was pulled. No savings were achieved. The $1.7 billion stayed on the Wall of Receipts.

Methodology: Followed for About a Quarter of the Money

DOGE published its own formula for calculating savings. GAO found DOGE followed it for only 27.5 percent of reported contract savings — about $16.8 billion across 7,710 contracts. For 60.7 percent of reported savings, DOGE either used a different calculation or GAO could not determine what method was used.

Grants were worse. GAO could not verify the calculation method behind 96 percent of reported grant savings.

Leases: The One Category GAO Could Verify to the Bottom

Leases were the smallest category and the only one GAO could fully trace, because GSA keeps complete records.

DOGE claimed $113 million in lease savings. Adding up DOGE's own line items produced $53.5 million — a roughly $59.5 million gap on the face of the government's own website. GAO then found that 108 of the listed leases, worth about $15.3 million, were already being phased out before DOGE was established in January 2025. Others had been rescinded or remained active.

GAO's verified figure was $31.8 million.

One termination also cost money rather than saving it. GAO reports that after a building owner refused to rescind a lease termination, GSA had to renegotiate a new lease at over $1.5 million more per year, with a new five-year firm term.

What This Means for Federal Employees

A few distinctions matter here, because it is easy to read more into an audit report than it actually says.

What the report establishes. The savings figures published on the Wall of Receipts were, in significant part, unverifiable, overstated, or attached to actions that never occurred. GAO recommended that the Executive Office of the President prominently display known data quality issues and limitations on the site. That recommendation remains open.

What it does not do. A GAO finding that savings were overstated does not by itself invalidate any particular RIF, termination, or reorganization. Agencies have broad authority to restructure. Challenges to a RIF succeed or fail on whether the agency followed the reduction in force regulations at 5 C.F.R. Part 351 — competitive area and competitive level, retention registers, proper notice, and correct application of retention standing — not on whether the savings math published elsewhere was accurate.

Where it may still matter. Where an agency's stated rationale for an action is on the record and that rationale is contradicted by verified government data, that contradiction can be relevant — to a pretext argument in a discrimination or reprisal case, to an OSC complaint alleging a prohibited personnel practice, or to a congressional or IG inquiry. Whether it helps in any individual case depends entirely on that case's record.

If You Were Affected

Keep your documents. Notices, position descriptions, retention register information, performance records, and any written explanation your agency gave for the action are the record an appellate body will eventually review. That is true regardless of what a savings dashboard says.

If you were separated, demoted, or furloughed in one of these actions and you are not sure whether the agency followed the rules, the attorneys for federal employees at Southworth PC can help you evaluate what happened and what options remain.

Legal Disclaimer: This content is for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Federal employment situations are fact-specific and time-sensitive. Please consult a qualified federal employment attorney about your specific situation.