logo
DOGE's private contract crackdown has eliminated more than 120 Deloitte contracts—more than twice the amount of any other consultancy

DOGE's private contract crackdown has eliminated more than 120 Deloitte contracts—more than twice the amount of any other consultancy

Yahoo03-04-2025

Major consulting firm has been hit hard by contract terminations carried out by the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). According to an analysis by Fortune, DOGE eliminated more than 120 contracts with the consultancy worth more than $1 billion. Economists warn the trend threatens future revenues of tech and consulting juggernauts.
As Elon Musk's Department of Government Efficiency continues its mass elimination of government contracts, no consultancy has been harder hit than Deloitte.
DOGE has cut or modified at least 124 Deloitte contracts since the beginning of President Donald Trump's second term, Fortune found in an analysis of DOGE's 'Wall of Receipts.' The contracts were worth more than $1.16 billion, with Musk's advisory group claiming to have saved taxpayers about $371.8 million from their terminations. The largest eliminated contract was worth more than $51 million for IT services for the Department of Health and Human Services.
Deloitte is one of at least 10 consulting firms with eliminated contracts. Comparatively, Booz Allen Hamilton had 61 contracts cut with an estimated $207.1 million 'saved'; Accenture had 30 cut contracts worth $240.2 million in claimed savings; and IBM had 10 contracts worth $34.3 million in savings eliminated, Business Insider reported, meaning Deloitte had more than twice as many contract cuts as any other consultancy.
Though DOGE claims to have saved a total of $140 billion, not all of it is true savings, according to Bank of America. The advisory group has 'overstated' its savings by failing to account for new contracts and inflating the value of other cancelled contracts, according to the bank. Other contracts listed on the DOGE Wall of Receipts were cancelled before Trump took office or ended naturally, The New York Times reported.
Still, DOGE's cuts represent real losses for government contractors. Deloitte, one of the big four consulting companies along with PwC, EY, and KPMG, reported $67.2 billion in revenue in fiscal 2024, with about 10% of it coming from government contracts.
The mass contract cuts follow an order from the General Services Administration, which asked major consultancies to submit detailed plans identifying places to cut prices or eliminate contracts that aren't 'mission critical,' the Financial Times reported Monday, citing internal correspondence and an anonymous senior administrator. Some consultancies had a Monday deadline to submit a 'scorecard' to the administration, which must reportedly include a dollar amount.
"This Administration is firmly of the view that America's private industry is our backbone and competitive advantage, however, that's not inconsistent with right-sizing spending, balancing the federal budget, and reducing our debt,' Josh Gruenbaum, GSA's federal acquisition service commissioner, told Fortune in a statement.
He added that the administration would be open to seeking out new contracts with private industry partners 'who also take the deficit as seriously.'
Deloitte did not respond to Fortune's request for comments.
There have already been warning signs of the broader financial and economic impact of the widespread private sector contract terminations, part of the Trump administration's efforts to overhaul government systems through mass funding cuts.
The government spent about $759 billion on contracts in fiscal 2023, according to the Government Accountability Office. Musk's own companies have received at least $20 billion from the federal government.
'It's a massive source of revenue for many different types of firms, not just government firms, but also private firms,' Abigail Blanco, an associate professor of economics at the University of Tampa, told Fortune. 'So there are lots of entities, private entities, who rely on—in whole, or in part—various government contracts or government funding to fulfill their primary objectives.'
Business management consultancy Accenture reported last month that its Federal Services arm lost federal contracts as a result of DOGE's cuts. Federal Services made up about 8% of Accenture's global revenue last year, according to CEO Julie Spellman Sweet. According to the DOGE website, the advisory terminated at least 30 contracts worth about $240.2 million in claimed savings.
'As you know, the new administration has a clear goal to run the federal government more efficiently,' Sweet told investors in a recent earnings call. 'During this process, many new procurement actions have slowed, which is negatively impacting our sales and revenue.'
Following the call, Accenture's shares plunged more than 7%.
Workplace management software firm Oracle was another tech giant impacted by $580 million in cuts to the Department of Defense.
Analysts fear that continued substantial contract cuts could mean bad news for revenues, particularly for companies like Booz Allen Hamilton, which works closely with the Defense Department. The Pentagon is responsible for more than half of the value of all government contracts. Booz Allen Hamilton gets about 98% of its revenue from government contracts.
'The defense industry is heavily reliant on federal spending, and budget reductions could affect future sales' of the consultancy, Wells Fargo equity analyst Matthew Akers told investors in a note last month. 'Government services contracts periodically come up for recompete, and any contract loss could materially affect results.'
Despite some cuts, the Defense Department has been largely unaffected by DOGE's reviews, economics professor Blanco said, despite arguments that the department has contracts with inflated costs for products that underdeliver.
According to Blanco, the broader contract cuts will likely lead to downstream effects that are difficult to recognize now. Companies impacted by these cuts will likely have to reorganize their labor force, including laying off employees they may have hired for certain projects funded through government contracts, she said.
But more broadly, the breadth of terminated contracts creates a sense of uncertainty, Blanco argued. While markets try to understand the swath of recent economic changes—such as Trump's aggressive tariff plan—companies will likely batten down the hatches to focus on finding alternative sources of funding. This 'wait-and-see' approach can help firms stabilize themselves, but doesn't fuel confidence necessary for innovation and expansion.
'The way that we get economic growth is when people are doing things, and they're trying stuff, and they're expanding their businesses,' Blanco said. 'But adopting this wait-and-see kind of approach, it's stagnant.'
This story was originally featured on Fortune.com

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

What drove the tech right's — and Elon Musk's — big, failed bet on Trump
What drove the tech right's — and Elon Musk's — big, failed bet on Trump

Vox

time9 minutes ago

  • Vox

What drove the tech right's — and Elon Musk's — big, failed bet on Trump

is a senior writer at Future Perfect, Vox's effective altruism-inspired section on the world's biggest challenges. She explores wide-ranging topics like climate change, artificial intelligence, vaccine development, and factory farms, and also writes the Future Perfect newsletter. While tech has generally been very liberal in its political support and giving, there's been an emergence of a real and influential tech right over the last few years. Allison Robbert/AFP via Getty Images I live and work in the San Francisco Bay Area, and I don't know anyone who says they voted for Donald Trump in 2016 or 2020. I know, on the other hand, quite a few who voted for him in 2024, and quite a few more who — while they didn't vote for Trump because of his many crippling personal foibles, corruption, penchant for destroying the global economy, etc. — have thoroughly soured on the Democratic Party. Future Perfect Explore the big, complicated problems the world faces and the most efficient ways to solve them. Sent twice a week. Email (required) Sign Up By submitting your email, you agree to our Terms and Privacy Notice . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply. It's not just my professional networks. While tech has generally been very liberal in its political support and giving, the last few years have seen the emergence of a real and influential tech right. Elon Musk, of course, is by far the most famous, but he didn't start the tech right by himself. And while his break with Trump — which Musk now seems to be backpedaling on — might have changed his role within the tech right, I don't think this shift will end with him. The rise of the tech right The Bay Area tech scene has always to my mind been best understood as left-libertarian — socially liberal, but suspicious of big government and excited about new things from cryptocurrency to charter cities to mosquito gene drives to genetically engineered superbabies to tooth bacteria. That array of attitudes sometimes puts them at odds with governments (and much of the public, which tends to be much less welcoming of new technology). The tech world valorizes founders and doers, and everyone knows two or three stories about a company that only succeeded because it was willing to break some city regulations. Lots of founders are immigrants; lots are LGBTQ+. For a long time, this set of commitments put tech firmly on the political left — and indeed tech employees overwhelmingly vote and donate to the Democratic Party. Related The AI that apparently wants Elon Musk to die But over the last 10 years, I think three things changed. The first was what Vox at the time called the Great Awokening — a sweeping adoption of what had been a bunch of niche liberal social justice ideas, from widespread acceptance of trans people to suspicion of any sex or race disparity in hiring to #MeToo awareness of sexual harassment in the workplace. A lot of this shift at tech companies was employee driven; again, tech employees are mostly on the left. And some of it was good! But some of it was illiberal — rejecting the idea that we can and should work with people we profoundly disagree with — and identitarian, in that it focused more on what demographic categories we belong to than our commonalities. We're now in the middle of a backlash, which I think is all the more intense in tech because the original woke movement was all the more intense in tech. The second thing that changed was the macroeconomic environment. When I first joined a tech company in 2017, interest rates were low and VC funding was incredibly easy to get. Startups were everywhere, and companies were desperately competing to hire employees. As a result, employees had a lot of power; CEOs were often scared of them. The third was a deliberate effort by many liberals to go after a tech scene they saw as their enemy. The Biden administration ended up staffed by a lot of people ideologically committed to Sen. Elizabeth Warren's view of the world, where big tech was the enemy of liberal democracy and the tools of antitrust should be used to break it up. Lina Khan's Federal Trade Commission acted on those convictions, going after big tech companies like Amazon. Whether you think this was the right call in economic terms — I mostly think it was not — it was decidedly self-destructive in political terms. So in 2024, some of tech (still not a majority, but a smaller minority than in the past two Trump elections) went right. The tech world watched with bated breath as Musk announced DOGE: Would the administration bring about the deregulation, tax cuts, and anti-woke wish list they believed that only the administration could? …and the immediate failure The answer so far has been no. (Many people on the tech right are still more optimistic than me, and point at a small handful of victories, but my assessment is that they're wearing rose-colored glasses to the point of outright blindness.) Some deregulation has happened, but any beneficial effects it would have had on investment have been more than canceled out by the tariffs' catastrophic effects on businesses' ability to plan for the future. They did at least get the tax cuts for the rich, if the 'big, beautiful bill' passes, but that's about all they got — and the ultra-rich will be poorer this year anyway thanks to the unsteady stock market. The Republicans, when out of power, had a critique of the Democrats which spoke to the tech right, the populist right, the white supremacists and moderate Black and Latino voters alike. But it's much easier to complain about Democrats in a way that all of those disparate interest groups find compelling than to govern in a way that keeps them all happy. Once the Trump administration actually had to choose, it chose basically none of the tech right's priorities. They took a bad bet — and I think it'd behoove the Democrats to think, as Trump's coalition fractures, about which of those voters can be won back.

VC Men Pour $250 Million Into Musk's ‘White Genocide'-Obsessed AI Business
VC Men Pour $250 Million Into Musk's ‘White Genocide'-Obsessed AI Business

Gizmodo

time19 minutes ago

  • Gizmodo

VC Men Pour $250 Million Into Musk's ‘White Genocide'-Obsessed AI Business

He may be hated by a vast number of the world's inhabitants, and his chatbot may have fixations on 'white genocide,' but it sure looks like Silicon Valley's money men still have a soft spot for Elon Musk. Venture capital firms are pouring hundreds of millions of dollars into Musk's AI business, xAI, which is the company that, as of a couple of months ago, owns and operates X, Musk's social media platform. The New York Times reports that, as part of a 'tender offer' deal, several prominent VCs, including Sequoia (which has invested in some of the most successful tech companies on the planet—from Google, Apple, and YouTube, to Nvidia and Whatsapp), have agreed to buy some $250 million of shares in Musk's company. A tender offer deal involves a company or companies agreeing to buy shares of stock in a particular firm directly from its shareholders. The Times notes that many of the organizations involved in the new offer have previously 'invested in Mr. Musk's companies, including the electric vehicle manufacturer Tesla and the rocket company SpaceX.' One of those firms is Fidelity, the financial services company, which currently owns a significant amount of X's stock. Fidelity plans to purchase approximately $20 million in xAI's stock as part of the new deal, according to The Times. The deal is yet another reminder that while Musk may currently be on the outs with the President of the United States, he is most likely going to be fine in the short term. There is still significant institutional interest in his companies, and it seems like orgs like Sequoia see a future in them. xAI is the company behind Grok, Musk's 'anti-woke' chatbot that is, sometimes, surprisingly woke. It also has, on occasion, broken down and ranted about 'white genocide' unprompted. The company merged with X (the company formerly known as Twitter, which Musk bought in 2022) earlier this year. True to form, Musk has made a lot of big promises about the robotics and automation opportunities his companies will produce in the years to come. He has alternately promised to launch a robotaxi business as well as to create a product line of domestic robots that will take care of Americans' household tasks. Relevantly, the billionaire's other company, Tesla, is busy suing one of its former robotics engineers, Jay Li, whom it has accused of stealing its trade secrets. The former engineer, who previously worked on Tesla's humanoid robot Optimus, has been accused of using tech developed at Musk's company to start his own company, 'Proception.' Neither Musk nor Li has shown the world anything particularly impressive on the robotics front.

Elon Musk Calls for ISS to be Dismantled: 'Too Old'
Elon Musk Calls for ISS to be Dismantled: 'Too Old'

Newsweek

time20 minutes ago

  • Newsweek

Elon Musk Calls for ISS to be Dismantled: 'Too Old'

Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. Tech billionaire Elon Musk has said that he wants the International Space Station taken out of orbit within two years. The SpaceX CEO said that the ISS was facing long-term safety issues that meant it was no longer feasible to maintain the space station for longer than two years, and called for it to be "deorbited." Why It Matters The ISS represents the longest international cooperation on space exploration in history, with contributions from Russia, Canada, the U.S, Europe and Japan all being used to maintain and man the station. NASA has committed to operating the ISS through 2030, but SpaceX has already been contracted to perform a "controlled reentry" by steering the station into a descent toward the Earth's atmosphere. What To Know Musk called for this timeline, which would see the ISS in use until the end of the decade, to be accelerated, describing the current status of the station as risky. "There are potentially serious concerns about the long-term safety of the ISS," Musk said on his social media site X on Friday morning. "Some parts of it are simply getting too old and obviously that risk grows over time. Even though SpaceX earns billions of dollars from transporting astronauts and cargo to the ISS, I nonetheless would like to go on record recommending that it be de-orbited within 2 years." The statement came in response to a report that NASA had delayed the Axiom Mission 4, which was meant to launch on Wednesday, indefinitely due to a leak in the ISS's Zvezda module. Elon Musk speaks during a press conference after the launch of SpaceX Crew Dragon Demo mission at the Kennedy Space Center in Florida on March 2, 2019. Elon Musk speaks during a press conference after the launch of SpaceX Crew Dragon Demo mission at the Kennedy Space Center in Florida on March 2, 2019. Getty Images The module was built in 1985 and was integrated into the ISS in 2000, making it over two decades old. SpaceX is a major partner in NASA's space exploration plans, and their Dragon flights regularly refuel the ISS while also escorting astronauts to and from the station. When astronauts Suni Williams and Butch Wilmore were left on the ISS for longer than expected after a Boeing aircraft that was meant to take them back to Earth malfunctioned, it was a SpaceX flight that brought them home. What People Are Saying NASA, in a statement on the future of the ISS, said: "In the future, the United States plans to transition its operations in low Earth orbit to commercially-owned and -operated destinations to ensure continued access to essential research and technology development. "At the conclusion of the International Space Station Program, the station will be deorbited in a controlled manner to ensure avoidance of populated areas on Earth. The station's safe deorbit is the shared responsibility of the five space agencies." What Happens Next NASA has not indicated that the 2030 commitment to maintaining the ISS has changed.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store