Buyouts that "cost" $7bn, or workers "paid not to work": one watchdog figure, two headlines

Both reports carry the same figure. The Government Accountability Office reported on Tuesday that the government spent $9.5 billion on paid administrative leave, $6.7 billion of it on the deferred resignation buyouts — a 435% rise in paid leave costs. Around 140,000 workers took the offer.

The split is the verb.

	Washington Examiner	The Hill
Headline	the buyouts "cost government nearly $7 billion"	employees "were paid nearly $7B not to work"
The administration's answer	"$40 billion annually" saved; a "400% return on investment"	not in the opening we hold
The watchdog's caveat on its own data	carried	not in the opening we hold
A federal worker quoted	one, unnamed	none in the opening we hold

The administration's number is untested. The Office of Personnel Management told the Washington Examiner the watchdog "fails to highlight the difference" between a one-time $9.5 billion expense to cut 270,000 jobs and "the $40 billion per year savings in taxpayer dollars that this reduction provides". Neither report we hold says how that saving is worked out.

Not settled. How the $40 billion is calculated. What the 435% rise is measured from — neither report gives the starting figure. And whether the leave total is sound: the Washington Examiner reports the watchdog found agency data that "could overstate the actual amount used", with agencies logging 144% more paid leave in pay periods containing a public holiday, when holidays should not be counted as leave at all. The same report says the personnel office does not know the actual costs.

What this is about. A federal audit agency has put a price on the programme that paid civil servants to quit, and the government it audited says the price is worth paying.

How it got here. Donald Trump took office in January 2025. Shortly afterwards the Department of Government Efficiency, headed by the X owner Elon Musk, sent federal employees an invitation it called "Fork in the Road": resign now and draw roughly eight months of pay and benefits without working. Around 140,000 people accepted, and were paid through September 2025. Unions for federal employees sued. In February 2025 US District Judge George O'Toole dismissed the case, ruling the unions lacked standing because they were not directly affected — their alleged harms were "upstream effects" such as diverted resources and possible reputational damage. A separate wave of firings ran alongside the buyouts: in March 2025, judges in Maryland and California ruled that the terminations of thousands of probationary workers were illegal, and at least 25,000 people were rehired, at Agriculture, Treasury, Veterans Affairs and Health and Human Services among others.

Who the actors are. The Government Accountability Office is Congress's audit arm; it examines how federal money is spent and reports to legislators, not to the president. The Office of Personnel Management is the federal government's human resources agency, run by a presidential appointee — here, director Scott Kupor. It ran the resignation offer, and it is the agency being audited.

What is at stake. Whether the largest cut to the federal workforce in recent memory is recorded as a saving or as a bill. That reading shapes whether the approach is repeated, and whether Congress treats the personnel office's numbers as reliable.

Where it stands. The audit is published. The personnel office disputes its framing, not its arithmetic. Nothing we hold tests either side's figure against the other.

What is being argued about

What the deferred resignation buyouts cost, and what the administration says they save
Whether the watchdog's own leave data is reliable enough to carry the 435% rise
Who gets named in the coverage — officials by name, federal workers by department
What the 435% rise is measured from

One watchdog report, two front pagesSide by side

Outlet	How the headline puts it	Administration's $40bn saving	Watchdog's caveat on its own data
Washington Examiner	the buyouts "cost government nearly $7 billion"	carried, in three quotations	carried
The Hill	employees "were paid nearly $7B not to work"	not in the opening we hold	not in the opening we hold

We hold the Washington Examiner's report in full and only the opening of The Hill's. "Not in the opening we hold" means we cannot see the rest, not that it was left out.

Sources

Washington Examiner

The Hill

The bias in this coverageBias

One figure, two verbs

Both reports we hold carry the same watchdog number — close to $7 billion — and each attaches a different verb to it: paid to reduce the bureaucracy, or paid not to work. Only one carries the administration's answer, its claimed $40 billion a year in savings, and only one carries the watchdog's own warning that the underlying data may overstate the total. Both publish a 435 percent rise in paid leave without the figure it rose from.

2 reports we hold on this event 1 reports carrying the claimed annual saving 1 reports carrying the watchdog's data caveat 1 reports quoting a federal worker

Scored without the mastheads. Where the two passes differ, both are kept.

Sources

Washington Examiner

The Hill

Claims and verdicts

true The Government Accountability Office found the government spent $9.5 billion on paid administrative leave, including $6.7 billion on the deferred resignation buyouts.

The Washington Examiner gives both figures from the Tuesday report, and The Hill separately reports the same watchdog finding of nearly $7 billion paid to outgoing employees not to work. Both read the same report, and neither contradicts the other on the totals.

Checked against 2 sources:

Washington Examiner

The Hill

misleading Paid administrative leave costs rose 435 percent.

Both the Washington Examiner and The Hill carry the 435 percent rise, but only the Washington Examiner reports that the GAO flagged limits in the agency data that "could overstate the actual amount used" — agencies reported 144 percent more leave in pay periods containing a public holiday. The figure is as reported, but the reports say the underlying data is unreliable.

Checked against 2 sources:

Washington Examiner

The Hill

unverified The workforce reduction saves taxpayers $40 billion a year.

The figure comes from the administration alone: the Washington Examiner quotes the Office of Personnel Management and its director Scott Kupor asserting $40 billion a year against a one-time $9.5 billion cost. The same report says the GAO found OPM does not know the actual costs of the leave used for these cuts, and no report we hold tests the savings figure.

Checked against 1 source:

Washington Examiner

Who wrote it

E Emily Hallas Washington Examiner

What the bias passes found in their reporting

Affected worker quoted, not named the one person hurt who speaks is anonymous while every official is named×1

Asymmetric label The Democratic opponent carries an ideological label. The Republican candidate in the same sentence carries none.×1

Characterisation of the number a 3-point lead inside a 3.9-point margin is called "razor-thin" rather than statistically level×1

Choice of verb for the same spend the same payment is defined by its stated purpose×1

Claims we checked that rest on their reporting

1 misleading1 disputed3 unverified8 true

From 142 reports we hold under this byline, at Washington Examiner. Two independent readings, each made without the masthead, a quote attached to every tag. A record, never a rating. Their full record →

R Rebecca Beitsch The Hill

What the bias passes found in their reporting

Actor named in the sentence the administration is the subject of the verb, and the workers are outgoing×1

Choice of verb for the same spend the payment is defined by what the workers did not do×1

Hedge on targets the targets are hedged as 'perceived' enemies×1

Passive headline, active lede the headline leaves the payer out; the first sentence names the administration doing the paying×1

Claims we checked that rest on their reporting

1 misleading1 disputed1 unverified5 true

From 53 reports we hold under this byline, at The Hill. Two independent readings, each made without the masthead, a quote attached to every tag. A record, never a rating. Their full record →

The bylines on the reports this story is built from. Hover one for what our passes have measured on their reporting.

Coverage, outlet by outlet

Washington Examiner — independent

DOGE’s ‘Fork in the road’ buyouts cost government nearly $7 billion: Watchdog

The only report we hold that carries the administration's answer — $40 billion a year saved, a "400% return on investment" from director Scott Kupor — and the only one carrying the watchdog's warning that agency leave

The Trump administration paid nearly $7 billion as part of an effort to reduce the size of the federal bureaucracy, according to a watchdog report released Tuesday. The Government Accountability Office said the government spent $9.5 billion on paid administrative leave, including $6.7 billion spent on the Department of Government Efficiency’s initiative to incentivize federal workers to leave their jobs via deferred resignations, marking a 435% increase in paid administrative leave costs. The Trump administration defended the “one-time” deferred resignation expense, saying it has helped save t

Choice of verb for the same spend: the same payment is defined by its stated purpose — “The Trump administration paid nearly $7 billion as part of an effort to reduce the size of the federal bureaucracy, according to a watchdog report released Tuesday.”

The other side's number carried: the administration's claimed annual saving is given room alongside the cost — “The Trump administration defended the “one-time” deferred resignation expense, saying it has helped save taxpayers overall $40 billion annually.”

The caveat on the number: the watchdog's own warning that the data may overstate the figure is carried — “GAO said in its report that OPM does not know the actual costs of the paid administrative leave used for workforce reduction efforts”

Whose voice: an affected worker is quoted, unnamed — ““It’s been emotional whiplash — you’re fired, no, you’re not fired, you’re on administrative leave — so many mixed messages,””

Headline picks the cost measure: the same nine-figure sum is framed as what the buyouts cost, attributed to the watchdog — “DOGE’s ‘Fork in the road’ buyouts cost government nearly $7 billion: Watchdog”

Rebuttal figure carried without a check: the annual saving and the return on investment are quoted from the agency being audited, unexamined — ““That 400% return on investment is a massive benefit to the taxpayer,” OPM director Scott Kupor told the Washington Examiner.”

The watchdog's own caveat kept in: the report states that the agency does not know the actual costs it is being measured on — “GAO said in its report that OPM does not know the actual costs of the paid administrative leave used for workforce reduction efforts, including the deferred resignation program.”

Affected worker quoted, not named: the one person hurt who speaks is anonymous while every official is named — “a reinstated employee at the Department of Transportation previously told the Washington Examiner”

Read it at Washington Examiner → https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/white-house/4729534/doge-buyout…

The Hill — independent

Federal employees were paid nearly $7B not to work under DOGE effort: GAO

Puts the payment in the headline as money for work not done — "paid nearly $7B not to work" — and names the administration as the payer in its first sentence. We hold only its opening, which carries the 435% rise with

The Trump administration paid outgoing employees an estimated nearly $7 billion to not work as it encouraged them to leave the federal service, a government watchdog found in a Tuesday report. Federal workers’ use of paid leave increased 435 percent under the first two years of the Trump administration, a dynamic the Government Accountability Office…

Choice of verb for the same spend: the payment is defined by what the workers did not do — “The Trump administration paid outgoing employees an estimated nearly $7 billion to not work as it encouraged them to leave the federal service”

Percentage without a base: a 435 percent rise is published with no starting figure — “Federal workers’ use of paid leave increased 435 percent under the first two years of the Trump administration”

Passive headline, active lede: the headline leaves the payer out; the first sentence names the administration doing the paying — “Federal employees were paid nearly $7B not to work under DOGE effort: GAO”

Actor named in the sentence: the administration is the subject of the verb, and the workers are outgoing — “The Trump administration paid outgoing employees an estimated nearly $7 billion to not work as it encouraged them to leave the federal service”

Read it at The Hill → https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/6092643-gao-report-trump-ad…

Checked, didn’t cover

Mother Jones

Reuters N NPR P Politico T The Washington Post

Fox News

Breitbart

MSNBC

The New York Times

National Review

Silence is recorded, not inferred — each of these was read when we built this story and carried nothing on this event.

We could not read these

The Wall Street Journal

Associated Press

These are must-cite outlets for this desk that we did not manage to read when we built this story. That is a gap in our reach, not a silence on their part, and it is not evidence of anything about this story.

Read another desk

Sections

Registers

Desks

Buyouts that "cost" $7bn, or workers "paid not to work": one watchdog figure, two headlines

What is being argued about

One figure, two verbs

Claims and verdicts

Who wrote it

Coverage, outlet by outlet