Elon Musk, a prominent tech entrepreneur and the world's richest individual, has indicated that his role in the U.S. government will decrease significantly starting next month. Musk's involvement in government became notable following the election of President Donald Trump, during which he played a key role in establishing the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). This office has been central to various initiatives aimed at restructuring the federal government, including workforce reductions and budget cuts.

DOGE has implemented measures such as offering financial incentives for public servants to resign and placing employees at the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) on administrative leave while cutting aid payments. The office has also sought to streamline government operations by requiring federal employees to document their work and has initiated a transition away from traditional payment methods, such as checks, towards more centralized digital systems.

In a recent update during Tesla's financial results announcement, Musk stated that his commitment to DOGE would reduce to one or two days per week. As a temporary government employee, Musk is subject to a limit of 130 working days per year.

Concurrently, the U.S. Office of Personnel Management (OPM) has outlined plans to modify the status of federal employees, potentially affecting around 50,000 positions. This change would transition certain roles to 'at-will' status, removing civil service protections that currently safeguard employees from arbitrary dismissal. The administration argues that this reform is necessary to enhance accountability and responsiveness within the government.

Critics, including the nonpartisan Partnership for Public Service, have expressed concerns that these changes could undermine the integrity of the civil service, making it more susceptible to political influence. They argue that a nonpartisan civil service is essential for effective governance and that the proposed reforms could lead to increased incompetence and corruption within federal agencies. The OPM has justified the changes by citing difficulties in managing employee performance and misconduct, suggesting that greater flexibility is needed to maintain effective governance.