President Donald Trump has launched a sweeping effort to downsize the U.S. federal workforce by offering voluntary buyouts to millions of government employees. The initiative, revealed in an email sent to federal workers on Tuesday, gives employees the option to resign with a severance package equivalent to eight months’ pay if they agree to leave by February 6.
According to CBS News, the Trump administration anticipates that approximately 10% of the federal workforce—around 200,000 employees—may accept the offer. If successful, the buyout program could result in government savings of up to $100 billion (£80 billion). The move aligns with Trump’s long-standing goal of reducing what he has called an “over-bloated bureaucracy” and reshaping the federal government’s structure.
Eligibility and Potential Consequences
The buyout package is available to nearly all federal workers, with some key exceptions. Employees in critical sectors, such as postal services, the military, immigration enforcement, and national security, were not included in the offer. Those eligible to resign were instructed to reply to the email with the word “resign” in the subject line, confirming their decision to accept the deal. The severance package will provide both pay and benefits to departing employees until September 30.
However, those who choose to remain in their roles face uncertainty. The Office of Personnel Management (OPM), the federal government’s HR agency, cautioned employees that future downsizing measures could impact their positions. The email stated, “We cannot give you full assurance regarding the certainty of your position or agency, but should your position be eliminated, you will be treated with dignity.” This warning suggests that further cuts may follow, potentially forcing workers out without the benefits currently being offered.
Political and Administrative Justifications
The Trump administration has framed the buyout program as part of a broader effort to streamline government operations and bring more conservative oversight to federal agencies. Stephen Miller, the White House deputy chief of staff for policy, told CNN that the federal workforce is “overwhelmingly left of center,” arguing that reducing its size is “essential” for Trump to “get control of government.”
This move follows Trump’s earlier directive requiring all federal employees who had been working remotely since the COVID-19 pandemic to return to office-based work five days a week. The buyout offer appears to be an extension of that policy, pushing for a leaner and more centralized federal workforce. While critics argue that the plan could lead to operational disruptions and a loss of institutional knowledge, supporters see it as a step toward reducing government inefficiencies and cutting costs.
As the February 6 deadline approaches, the federal workforce faces a critical decision—whether to take the offer and exit with financial security or remain and risk potential layoffs in the coming months.
Mass Buyout Offer Sparks Chaos in Washington
President Donald Trump has reaffirmed his commitment to reducing the size of the federal government and slashing spending as part of his 2024 campaign agenda. In pursuit of this goal, Trump appointed billionaire Elon Musk and entrepreneur Vivek Ramaswamy to lead an advisory body focused on cutting regulations, spending, and workforce within federal agencies. This body, informally dubbed the “Department of Government Efficiency” (DOGE), was designed to streamline government operations. However, Ramaswamy has since exited the initiative, raising questions about its long-term viability.
On Tuesday, a mass buyout email reminiscent of Musk’s controversial workforce reduction at Twitter (now X) in late 2022 sent shockwaves through Washington. Federal employees were reportedly asked to respond via email if they wished to retain their positions. This drastic measure came just hours after Trump issued a memo announcing a pause on federal grants, loans, and other forms of assistance.
The memo’s abrupt rollout led to widespread confusion regarding which agencies and programs would be affected. Concerned over potential disruptions to Social Security payments and Medicaid access, the White House moved swiftly to assure the public that these critical services would not be impacted. A federal district judge intervened, suspending the order until the following Monday, temporarily easing concerns.
Trump Signs Executive Order Restricting Gender Care for Minors
Amid the ongoing political turmoil, Trump also signed an executive order on Tuesday aimed at restricting gender-affirming care for young people under 19. The order, titled “Protecting Children from Chemical and Surgical Mutilation,” explicitly states that the federal government will not fund, sponsor, or support gender transition procedures for minors. The move aligns with Trump’s broader agenda to roll back progressive policies on gender identity and healthcare, a stance that has been met with sharp criticism from civil rights organizations and Democratic lawmakers.
The legal and practical implications of the order remain uncertain, as opponents are expected to challenge its enforceability in court. Advocacy groups argue that the directive could infringe on states’ rights and medical autonomy, while supporters claim it is necessary to protect minors from making irreversible medical decisions. In a letter to the White House, top Democrats expressed “extreme alarm” over both the funding freeze and the new restrictions on gender-affirming care, warning of potential constitutional and humanitarian repercussions. As the legal battles unfold, this latest executive action further underscores the deeply polarized landscape of U.S. politics under Trump’s leadership.
