The Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) has made significant progress in identifying and eliminating wasteful government spending, reportedly saving $1 billion per day. While this is commendable, the proposal to send a $5,000 “DOGE Dividend” to taxpayers misses the mark. Instead of focusing on permanent tax relief and true fiscal responsibility, it attempts to pacify taxpayers with a temporary financial boost.

A Short-Term Fix, Not Long-Term Reform

The DOGE Dividend is structured as a refund to taxpaying households, funded entirely by savings rather than new government spending. While this means it wouldn’t directly contribute to inflation, it also does nothing to fix systemic government inefficiencies. A one-time payment might provide short-term relief, but it doesn’t address the fundamental issue: the federal government has a spending problem, not a revenue problem.

If DOGE is successful in saving $2 trillion, the best course of action would be to apply the full amount toward permanent solutions. Instead of setting aside 20% ($400 billion) for temporary payouts, that money could be used to:

• Reduce the national debt at a time when interest payments are consuming an increasing share of the federal budget.
• Implement permanent tax cuts that provide lasting relief for individuals and businesses.
• Fund continued cost-cutting measures to ensure government spending stays in check.

The “Tax Morale” Argument is Misguided

Supporters claim the DOGE Dividend would restore trust between taxpayers and the government by showing them tangible benefits of spending cuts. However, trust in government isn’t restored by a one-time check—it’s restored by responsible governance. If policymakers want to prove they are serious about efficiency, they should ensure savings lead to permanent tax relief rather than temporary redistribution.

The idea that the DOGE Dividend would incentivize people to report government waste is also flawed. Taxpayers already want a more efficient government. They don’t need a $5,000 check as motivation to call out waste—they need politicians who stop wasting their money in the first place.

House Speaker Mike Johnson dismissed the idea of a DOGE Dividend stimulus check at CPAC, emphasizing that while it may be politically appealing, it contradicts conservative principles of fiscal responsibility. Citing the $36 trillion national debt and growing deficit, he argued that reducing government debt should take priority over issuing payments to taxpayers.

Would the DOGE Dividend Avoid Inflation?

One defense of the proposal is that, unlike COVID-era stimulus checks, it wouldn’t be deficit-financed or increase the money supply. While this is technically true, it doesn’t mean the policy is free from economic consequences and inflation. 

• A large percentage of the $400 billion payout would be spent, pushing up consumer demand- as people will take the stimulus checks and spend them. 
• Government redistribution of taxpayer savings influences economic activity in ways that disrupt free market decision-making.
• The plan could set a dangerous political precedent, where instead of making structural reforms, the government simply redistributes “savings” back to taxpayers.

Conclusion: Real Fiscal Responsibility Means Lower Taxes, Not More Government Handouts

The DOGE Dividend may be framed as a “tax refund,” but it’s really just another government program that does nothing to rein in spending long-term. The best way to restore faith in government is not by sending out checks—it’s by ensuring Americans keep more of their earnings through lower taxes and reduced government spending. Instead of a temporary $5,000 payout, policymakers should focus on lasting tax cuts, meaningful debt reduction, and eliminating wasteful programs once and for all.