Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Trump, Musk move to cut federal workforce under new order

The move is part of an effort to reduce the federal workforce and align it with Trump’s policy priorities.

trump-musk-

Musk, standing alongside Trump in the Oval Office with his 4-year-old son, said he was leading the effort to cut government waste. (Photo: Getty Images)

US PRESIDENT Donald Trump has directed federal agencies to work with Elon Musk to identify government jobs that can be cut and functions that can be eliminated.

The move is part of an effort to reduce the federal workforce and align it with Trump’s policy priorities.


Musk, standing alongside Trump in the Oval Office with his 4-year-old son, said he was leading the effort to cut government waste.

Wearing a “Make America Great Again” cap, the billionaire defended his role in overseeing the initiative despite holding no elected position.
"You can't have an autonomous federal bureaucracy. You have to have one that's responsive to the people," Musk said. He described the bureaucracy as an “unconstitutional” fourth branch of government, arguing that it had "more power than any elected representative."

Musk, who owns Tesla and social media platform X, dismissed concerns over transparency in his team’s work. The Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), which he leads, has not disclosed details about its employees, operations, or specific actions inside agencies. It has only shared pound figures on reported budget cuts without further specifics.

"I fully expect to be scrutinised and get, you know, a daily proctology exam, basically," Musk said. "It's not like I think I can get away with something."

He also pushed back against criticism, particularly from Democrats, that his role amounted to a non-transparent takeover of government operations.

"You couldn't ask for a stronger mandate from ... the public," Musk said, citing Trump's election victory. "The people voted for major government reform. There should be no doubt about that."

Musk said he speaks to Trump nearly every day about the initiative.

The executive order signed Tuesday requires agencies to hire no more than one new employee for every four who leave.

It also directs agencies to work with Musk’s team to identify large-scale job cuts and consider eliminating certain agency components.

Employees in national security, public safety, law enforcement, and immigration enforcement are exempt.

Many government workers are part of labour unions, meaning layoffs and job reductions must comply with collective bargaining agreements. Non-union civil service employees also have legal job protections.

The administration has previously tried to reduce staff through buyout offers, though a federal judge blocked that effort.

Buyout push and legal challenges

Trump and Musk estimate the cuts could save £806 billion by reducing government waste, nearly 15 per cent of total federal spending.

Trump rejected claims that Musk’s role posed a conflict of interest, despite his leadership of SpaceX, which has lucrative contracts with the Pentagon and intelligence agencies.

"If we thought that, we would not let him do that segment or look in that area, if we thought there was a lack of transparency or a conflict of interest," Trump said.

Trump’s broader efforts to reduce the federal workforce have faced legal challenges. Courts have halted his buyout plan and blocked Musk’s access to sensitive Treasury payment systems.

A judge also stopped an order placing USAID workers on leave.

The US government has about 2.3 million civilian employees, excluding postal workers. While security agencies account for many of these jobs, others involve veterans' healthcare, agriculture inspections, and financial operations.

Earlier, Musk took to X to criticise law firms challenging the administration’s plans.

"Which law firms are pushing these anti-democratic cases to impede the will of the people?" he wrote.

He also criticised judges who blocked Trump’s orders, calling it a "judicial coup" that was undermining democracy.

Trump echoed this view in his meeting with Musk.

"We want to weed out the corruption. And it seems hard to believe that a judge could say, we don’t want you to do that," Trump said.

"So maybe we have to look at the judges, because that’s very serious."

Trump said he would follow court rulings but criticised their impact.

"I always abide by the courts, and then I’ll have to appeal it," he said. "Then what ... he’s done is he’s slowed down the momentum, and it gives crooked people more time to cover up the books."

(With inputs from Reuters)

More For You

Lakshmi Mittal

Mittal's exit comes as Rachel Reeves prepares a fresh tax raising budget aimed at balancing the government's finances

Getty Images

Lakshmi Mittal quits Britain for Switzerland and Dubai over inheritance tax concerns

Highlights

  • Lakshmi Mittal, worth over £15 bn, has moved his tax residence from UK to Switzerland with plans to spend most time in Dubai.
  • Inheritance tax concerns, not income tax, drove the decision of the "King of Steel" to leave after 30 years in Britain.
  • The departure marks another high-profile exit as chancellor Rachel Reeves prepares major tax rises in the coming Budget.
Lakshmi Mittal, one of Britain's wealthiest men, has ended his three-decade association with the UK, relocating his tax residence to Switzerland and planning to base himself in Dubai. The 74-year-old steel magnate, worth approximately £15.5 bn according to the Asian Rich List 2025, is the latest prominent entrepreneur to leave Britain amid Labour's tax reforms targeting the super-rich.

The Indian-born billionaire built his fortune through ArcelorMittal, the world's second-largest steelmaker, in which he and his family hold nearly 40 per cent ownership. Since arriving in London in 1995, Mittal became a prominent figure in British business, acquiring expensive properties including a £57 m mansion on Kensington Palace Gardens known as the "Taj Mittal."

An adviser familiar with Mittal's family plans told The Sunday Times that, inheritance tax was the decisive factor in the decision. "It wasn't the tax on income or capital gains that was the issue, the issue was inheritance tax."

Keep ReadingShow less