President Donald Trump said he would consider the plan to pay out $5,000 stimulus checks to taxpayers in the form of a 'DOGE dividend' during a recent speech. He explained it as a part to take 20% of the savings identified by Elon Musk's Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) and give it back to the American taxpayers.
This 'DOGE dividend' idea was originally floated by Azoria investment firm CEO James Fishback on Musk's social media platform X, suggesting Trump and Musk "should announce a ‘DOGE Dividend’ — a tax refund check sent to every taxpayer, funded exclusively with a portion of the total savings delivered by DOGE." To which, Musk replied "Will check with the President."
In an interview with NewsNation, Fishback said he was "optimistic a bill is forthcoming to put President Trump's vision for DOGE coming full circle into law." Adding, "It isn't just enough … to identify waste, fraud and abuse. We have to refund the taxpayer their hard-earned money when their money was wasted and misused, and that's what the DOGE dividend calls for."
Fishback described meetings with lawmakers in the House and Senate as "very productive" and said a plan may be revealed soon.
Trump hasn't shared any further specifics or details about the possible 'DOGE dividend' or its certainty.
Fishback's four-page proposal of the 'DOGE dividend' described it as a refund "sent only to tax-paying householders." Noting the difference from past stimulus checks, he added that DOGE checks would not be inflationary as they would be "exclusively funded with DOGE-driven savings, unlike COVID stimulus checks which were deficit-financed."
Fishback's proposal would send dividends only to households above a certain income level as opposed to pandemic-era checks that were sent “indiscriminately.”
“A lot of low-income households essentially saw transfer payments of 25 to 30% of their annual … income,” Fishback said of the pandemic stimulus checks, adding, “This exclusively goes to households that are net-payers of federal income tax, and what that means is that they have a lower propensity to spend and a higher propensity to save a transfer payment like the DOGE dividend.”
The potential refund would be sent only to households that are net-income taxpayers — people who pay more in taxes than they get back — with lower-income Americans not qualifying for the return, according to news reports. The Pew Research Center cites most Americans who have an adjusted gross income of under $40,000 pay effectively no federal income tax.
"I'm honored to have the president's support, but the plan is very simple," Fishback said last week, according to news source. "DOGE is going to save X amount of money over the next couple of years. Let's take 20 percent of that and send it right back to the hard-working taxpayers who sent it to D.C. in the first place."
By definition, a dividend is a distribution of profits by a corporation to its shareholders and refund is a payment made back to a user that previously paid for something. A stimulus check on the other hand, is a direct payment to encourage spending and stimulate the economy by putting money directly into the consumers' hand.
by Maria Francis, USA Today | Read more:
Image: X
[ed. This is the scariest thing I've heard yet, and so far everyone is being very, very quiet. I've seen first-hand what government dividends do to the voting public (Alaska Permanent Fund). Suddenly, anything that could potentially stop the free flow of free money is dead in the water - including funding of basic governmental services. Thankfully, DOGE isn't finding much in the way of fraud (although curiously they've avoided the elephant in the room - defense spending; wonder why), but that won't stop a disinformation campaign from occuring, illusory or not. Keep your eyes open! As much as people love free money this would definitely establish a strong incentive to keep finding new programs to cut. Forever.]
"Public opinion strongly favors the Dividend program. Indeed, in 1999, with oil prices going as low as $9 per barrel and Alaska's oil consultant Daniel Yergin forecasting low prices "for the foreseeable future", the State put an advisory vote before Alaskans, asking if government could spend "some" part of Permanent Fund earning for government purposes. Gov. Knowles, Lt. Gov. Ulmer, and many other elected officials urged a "yes" vote. Campaign spending greatly favored the "yes" side. Despite this, the public voted "no" by nearly 84%.... Perceived support of the dividend program is so universally strong that it ensures the dividend's continuity and the protection of the Fund's principal, since any measure characterized as negatively impacting dividend payouts represents a loss to the entire populace. That is, legislators willing to appropriate the Fund's annual earnings are constrained by the high political costs of any measures leading to a decrease in the public's dividend." (Wikipedia).
"Public opinion strongly favors the Dividend program. Indeed, in 1999, with oil prices going as low as $9 per barrel and Alaska's oil consultant Daniel Yergin forecasting low prices "for the foreseeable future", the State put an advisory vote before Alaskans, asking if government could spend "some" part of Permanent Fund earning for government purposes. Gov. Knowles, Lt. Gov. Ulmer, and many other elected officials urged a "yes" vote. Campaign spending greatly favored the "yes" side. Despite this, the public voted "no" by nearly 84%.... Perceived support of the dividend program is so universally strong that it ensures the dividend's continuity and the protection of the Fund's principal, since any measure characterized as negatively impacting dividend payouts represents a loss to the entire populace. That is, legislators willing to appropriate the Fund's annual earnings are constrained by the high political costs of any measures leading to a decrease in the public's dividend." (Wikipedia).
