DOGE's actual impact is less than 10 billion USD, is Trump's real intention to cover up the "extension of tax cuts"?

On March 5th local time, the Financial Times reported that investment bank Jefferies invited analysts Jessica Riedl from the Manhattan Institute, Alex Nowrasteh from the Cato Institute, and Ryan Bourne for a discussion.

The Cato Institute shared its research on the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE):

1. Clearing Progressive Influence: DOGE is used to eliminate left-leaning personnel and policies within the U.S. federal government, as evidenced by its exemptions for security agencies, focus on dismantling diversity programs, and the firing of probationary employees appointed by the Biden administration;
2. Musk-style Corporate Restructuring: DOGE is applying Musk's cost-cutting strategies to the U.S. federal government, prioritizing layoffs, even though personnel costs account for a small portion of overall federal spending;
3. Public Relations Strategy for Spending Cuts: By focusing on small-scale spending projects, DOGE may be leveraging public misunderstandings of federal spending to push a broader austerity agenda;
4. Expanding Executive Power: DOGE is testing the limits of presidential control over federal spending, potentially paving the way for Supreme Court rulings that weaken Congressional restrictions on the use of funds;
5. Political Cover for Fiscal Policy: DOGE acts as a shield for Congressional Republicans, allowing them to extend the 2017 tax cuts and expand the fiscal deficit while only making minimal spending cuts.

Has DOGE Really Cut $100 Billion in Spending?

Previously, DOGE claimed it saved $105 billion through layoffs and contract cancellations—however, the actual figure may only be $10 billion, or less than 0.2% of the U.S. fiscal deficit.

The Manhattan Institute's analysis further estimates the actual savings at about $2 billion, accounting for only 0.03% of the U.S. federal budget, summarizing DOGE's strategy as "the performance art of spending cuts."

The Manhattan Institute stated, if DOGE's goal is to balance the budget, relying solely on layoffs and contract cancellations is clearly insufficient, especially when Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, veterans' benefits, defense, and debt interest account for 75% of U.S. federal spending. Specifically:

1. Cutting 25% of federal employees would only save 1% of the budget;
2. Completely eliminating USAID (U.S. Agency for International Development) would only reduce spending by 0.6%;
3. A more realistic goal is to reduce payment errors, but this could save at most $100 billion.

The Manhattan Institute and the Cato Institute also added that deporting immigrants will not solve the problem.

Are DOGE's Savings Just a Drop in the Bucket?

The Manhattan Institute and the Cato Institute stated, under current tax policies and moderate spending adjustments, the U.S. deficit is expected to rise from $20 trillion to $36 trillion over the next decade. If the U.S. defaults on its debt, there will be no external rescue, and the economic shock will be severe. One of the core factors leading to rising costs is social security, primarily due to changes in the demographic structure—previously, five workers supported one retiree, but now this ratio has dropped to three to one, and it is expected to decrease to two to one in the next decade.

As a result, some American lawmakers acknowledge that the U.S. must adjust social security, but raising the retirement age or cutting benefits comes with a high political cost