James Fishback revealed that the concept struck him during a recent dream: to issue dividend checks to American taxpayers using the funds saved by Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency as it streamlines portions of the federal government.
The notion gained traction on Tuesday after Fishback tweeted about it, prompting Musk’s response, where he committed to sharing the idea with Trump. Following this, the president detailed Fishback’s proposal from the stage at the FII Priority Summit in Miami Beach on Wednesday.
“There’s even consideration for a new idea where we provide 20% of the DOGE savings to American citizens, and 20% for debt repayment, because the figures are astounding, Elon,” Trump stated.
Nonetheless, if Trump acts upon the plan as envisioned by Fishback, low-income Americans may not reap the benefits.
Fishback, who is the CEO of the investment firm Azoria and briefly collaborated with former presidential candidate Vivek Ramaswamy during DOGE’s early stages, told NBC News that he woke from the dream and, in collaboration with the lead researcher at his firm, drafted a concise proposal aimed at sending checks to millions of American households.
“We put this idea together in approximately two and a half hours,” Fishback commented on Wednesday. “We forwarded it to [White House chief of staff] Susie [Wiles], reached out to several individuals in the administration, and some contacts at the Treasury, and here we are a day later, with it being presented to President Trump by Elon. It’s thrilling.”
This situation highlighted Musk’s ability to attract the president’s attention to seemingly random ideas—such as one from an obscure 30-year-old investor—floating around on his social media platform, X.
The concept of a “DOGE dividend” isn’t entirely alien to Trump; it aligns with a pandemic-era program from his first term, during which the government disbursed direct payments to Americans bearing the president’s endorsement.
“The President of the United States ought to sign the checks, and they should clearly say DOGE, quite simply, because we must be transparent,” Fishback asserted, adding: “As CEO of Azoria, when I distribute checks to employees monthly, my name is on them. President Trump is the nation’s leader, the duly elected president of the United States. His name belongs on the checks. As should DOGE, as it accounts for these savings.”
During the pandemic, however, checks were dispatched to all individuals earning below a specific threshold.
In his proposal, Fishback operates under the assumption that DOGE could yield $2 trillion in government savings. He allocates 20% of that, equating to $400 billion, among 79 million taxpaying households, allowing each to receive $5,000. Notably, this rebate would be limited to net-income taxpayers—those who pay more in taxes than they reclaim—meaning many low-income Americans would be ineligible for this return. According to the Pew Research Center, the majority of individuals with an adjusted gross income under $40,000 effectively pay no federal income tax.
Fishback contends that since the dividend checks would be derived from previously appropriated funds rather than deficit financing, they wouldn’t exacerbate inflation.
“The DOGE Dividend differs from prior stimulus checks (e.g., 2021 American Rescue Plan) because it exclusively reaches tax-paying households,” he writes. “Such households are generally more likely to save (rather than spend) a transfer payment like the DOGE Dividend, as consumption represents a smaller portion of their income. … There’s nothing inflationary about paying off debt, saving for emergencies, or investing in education or retirement. In fact, paying down debt is essentially deflationary.”
In a separate interview, Fishback stated that restricting the dividend to households above a certain income level should alleviate concerns regarding potential inflationary effects, contrasting it with the indiscriminate distribution of pandemic-era checks.
“Numerous low-income households effectively received transfer payments ranging from 25 to 30% of their annual income,” Fishback remarked, adding, “This initiative specifically targets households that are net-payers of federal income tax, which means they have a lesser inclination to spend and a higher likelihood of saving a transfer payment like the DOGE Dividend.”
However, even within the Republican party, there’s no unified stance on disbursing checks derived from DOGE’s savings—whose total remains undetermined. The initiative claims on its website to have saved $55 billion thus far, but some assertions have not held up to basic scrutiny. One instance involved a claim that DOGE saved $8 billion from a single canceled contract at the Department of Homeland Security, despite that contract clearly indicating a value of just $8 million.
Musk initially promised that DOGE would uncover $2 trillion in savings by mid-next year but has since tempered his expectations.
“We need to ascertain if any savings have truly materialized before promising people checks,” said Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody’s Analytics, adding: “I thought the goal was to address our deficit. Offering a dividend certainly doesn’t contribute to that. It feels as if we’re putting the cart before the horse. I have the cart but can’t yet see the horse.”
Regarding the proposal to restrict rebates to American households above a specific income level, Zandi concurred that such an approach would likely result in a greater number of recipients saving payments rather than spending them immediately.
“We’re really splitting hairs,” he said. “These are marginal issues. The overarching point is that … DOGE has significant challenges ahead to confirm whether it truly saves and eventually benefits the economy before discussing dividend checks.”
When asked about the initiative at the Conservative Political Action Conference on Thursday, House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., didn’t seem enthusiastic about the proposal.
“From a political standpoint, that would be advantageous for us, you know. It issues checks to everyone,” Johnson stated. “However, when we reflect on our core principles, fiscal responsibility is central to our identity as conservatives. We have a $36 trillion national debt and a massive deficit we’re managing. I believe we need to settle our debts, correct?”
From the CPAC stage that same day, Musk mentioned that he had discussed the proposal with Trump, confirming that the president supports it. Musk, the world’s wealthiest individual and possibly the most influential advisor to the president, remarked, “It sounds like … something we’re going to do.”
The White House opted not to comment on the proposal.
Fishback visited Washington this week and reported promising discussions regarding the proposal, though he refrained from disclosing specific individuals. He did share a video of a brief exchange he had with Musk on Thursday.
“Now, for those who may criticize this plan, claiming DOGE couldn’t possibly deliver $2 trillion in total savings, we disagree, yet if we assume they’re correct,” Fishback stated. “Let’s say it’s only $1 trillion. Then the check would adjust from $5,000 to $2,500. Assume it’s merely $500 billion. … The check would then be $1,250. That’s still significant money.”
“I must be honest here. It’s not just about the dollar figure,” he emphasized. “It symbolizes the government returning funds as restitution to hardworking Americans, whether they reside in East Baltimore or East Palestine, compensating for the misuse and abuse of their diligently earned tax dollars.”
However, as Zandi pointed out, the cuts may not come without potential economic repercussions.
“There’s no such thing as a free lunch,” he stated. “If you terminate jobs, that will impact the economy. There’s a cost involved. It’s essential to comprehend the broader economic consequences, both in the short term and the long run. You’re presuming that the jobs being eliminated and the reductions in work operations are truly unimportant, [suggesting] that those employees in the FAA, USAID, the FTC, and the FDA are doing nothing beneficial.”
“Taking that position requires a firm belief that those jobs hold no significant value and do not contribute to our nation’s economic well-being,” he added. “I don’t claim to possess that knowledge, but I doubt anyone else does either.”
