Politics

The Real Reason Behind Trump's $9.5 Billion Pay-to-Quit Program

A new government report reveals the eye-popping cost of the Trump administration's initiative to shrink the federal workforce by paying thousands of employees to resign.

WhyThisBuzz DeskSep 16, 20262 min read
Share:

A newly released Government Accountability Office (GAO) report reveals that the federal government spent a staggering $9.5 billion last year paying employees not to work.

The driving force behind the spend was a massive push by the Trump administration and its Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) to rapidly downsize the federal bureaucracy.

What Was the Deferred Resignation Program?

In January 2025, the administration launched the "deferred resignation program." The offer was simple: roughly 2 million federal employees were given the option to resign while continuing to receive full pay and benefits through September 30, 2025.

The Office of Personnel Management (OPM) directed agencies to place participating employees on paid administrative leave until their official departure dates.

According to the GAO, this single initiative cost taxpayers $6.7 billion—accounting for roughly 70% of the total $9.5 billion spent on paid administrative leave in 2025. In total, 139,963 employees accepted the offer and left the government.

Which Agencies Were Hit the Hardest?

The program fueled a 12% net decline in the civilian federal workforce, resulting in the departure of more than 271,000 employees by July 2026. However, the staffing cuts were highly unequal across departments.

Between December 2024 and January 2026, staffing levels plummeted at several key agencies:

  • USAID: Down 95%
  • Department of Education: Down 46%
  • General Services Administration (GSA): Down 37%
  • Office of Personnel Management (OPM): Down 34%
  • National Science Foundation: Down 33%

By contrast, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) saw its workforce decrease by less than 1%.

The rapid exodus created immediate operational gaps. By June 2026, agencies had already hired 20,557 people to fill the exact same roles vacated by those who took the buyout.

Wasteful Spending or Long-Term Savings?

OPM Director Scott Kupor strongly defended the program's economics, arguing that the $6.7 billion administrative leave cost was a necessary, one-time investment. Kupor expects the workforce reductions to save taxpayers $20 billion annually.

"The savings recur every year, while the administrative leave costs... were incurred once," Kupor stated.

However, congressional watchdogs and Democrats remain highly skeptical. Senator Patty Murray (D-Wash.), the top Democrat on the Appropriations Committee, accused the administration of hollowing out vital services.

"Trump spent billions to push out experienced and badly needed experts across government," Murray said. "This was the most expensive way imaginable to make government worse."