On Tuesday, September 15, the Government Accountability Office put a number on the quiet cost of last year’s federal downsizing: about $9.5 billion in salary paid to employees on administrative leave in 2025, roughly six times the 2023 figure, and $6.7 billion of it went to people who had accepted the “deferred resignation” offer and were told to stay home, on full pay, until their separation date. About 140,000 employees took the deal. Nearly 100,000 of them were paid for at least three months of not working.
Story Highlights
- GAO (report GAO-26-108477, released September 15) estimates $9.5 billion in paid administrative leave salary costs in 2025, up from $1.5 billion in 2023 and $1.7 billion in 2024.
- About $6.7 billion was tied to the deferred resignation program run through the Office of Personnel Management; 126,000 employees were on paid leave at least two months, nearly 100,000 at least three, some six months or longer.
- OPM authorized placing participants on paid leave as part of the program and called it legal and in the government’s interest.
- OPM has agreed to disclose data-reliability problems and to create a new payroll category for workforce-reduction leave.
Where This Stands Right Now
The report landed Tuesday and the fight over it is already framed: critics say a program sold as savings produced a ten-figure bill; the administration’s position is that paid leave was a one-time bridge to a permanently smaller payroll, and that honoring the agreements let reorganizations proceed without lawsuits or delay. What neither side has published is the other half of the ledger — how many of the 140,000 positions stayed empty, how many were refilled, and what the payroll looks like now. GAO’s number is the cost. The savings are still a promise.
Federal employees were paid $9.5 billion not to work in 2025 under DOGE.
As part of the Trump-Musk DOGE program to shrink the federal work force, paid administrative leave costs rose by 435%.https://t.co/JFC8dJFIMt
— Kyle Griffin (@kylegriffin1) September 15, 2026
What GAO Found About Paid Leave and the 2025 Spike
GAO’s estimate rests on payroll data and time-and-attendance records, not advocacy models. The surge was tied to workforce actions under the Department of Government Efficiency initiative, known as DOGE, and the use of paid leave rose about 435 percent across the two-year window, underscoring how unusual the spike was compared with prior norms. These numbers describe salary costs only. They do not cover any future savings or separate hiring, training, or contractor costs.
How the Deferred Resignation Program Worked
Office of Personnel Management guidance told agencies that employees who accepted deferred resignation should have duties reassigned or ended and be placed on paid administrative leave until their resignation date, unless needed for a brief handoff. OPM later affirmed the legality of using paid administrative leave for this purpose, answering “Yes” to whether employees could be placed on leave during the program. A template policy framed this use of leave as serving a leaner, more efficient federal workforce.
Agency communications reflected that direction. The Department of Health and Human Services told participants they were expected to be on administrative or other leave by a set date. In 2026 guidance, OPM said agencies could use deferred resignation agreements of up to six months, subject to budgets and appropriations, keeping the tool available for continuing restructuring. Supporters say this approach honored agreements with departing staff while enabling reorganizations to proceed without delay.
Why the Price Tag Fuels Public Frustration
Taxpayers on the right and left look at $9.5 billion in paid leave and see a system that pays for inactivity while families face high costs and long waits for services. Critics argue DOGE promised savings but delivered a large near-term bill. Supporters counter that paid leave is a one-time bridge to a smaller payroll. Both views hinge on data the public cannot fully see yet: agency-level costs, the duration of leave per employee, and how many positions were truly eliminated versus later refilled.
Historical reviews show administrative leave is usually a tiny slice of federal time, which makes a spike this large stand out. The split comes down to whether this spike was a necessary cost of change or proof of waste. GAO’s headline number is solid enough to guide oversight. The next step is transparency: publish the full tables and assumptions, and show if promised savings offset these costs. Citizens deserve clear math when billions are on the line.
Sources:
theguardian.com, mediaite.com, business.gmu.edu, nationalmemo.com, opm.gov, lelsbrief.com, content.govdelivery.com
