WASHINGTON, DC – New evidence indicates Elon Musk's lieutenants from the so-called “Department of Government Efficiency” (“DOGE”) were in fact more involved with attempting to access and suspend payments through the U.S. Treasury Department's highly sensitive payment processing system.

The New York Times reported on recently uncovered e mails from senior Treasury officials, noting: “emails reviewed by The New York Times show that the Treasury’s chief of staff originally pushed for Tom Krause, a software executive affiliated with Mr. Musk’s so-called Department of Government Efficiency, to receive access to the closely held payment system so that the Treasury could freeze U.S. Agency for International Development payments.

“In a Jan. 24 email to a small group of Treasury officials, the chief of staff, Dan Katz, wrote that Mr. Krause and his team needed access to the system so they could pause U.S.A.I.D. payments and comply with Mr. Trump’s Jan. 20 executive order to halt foreign aid.”

Senator Reed and other lawmakers have been seeking answers about how, why, and whether Mr. Musk's DOGE operatives gained access to highly sensitive personal data and payment information for millions of Americans and businesses.

After sending a letter to new Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent on February 3 and receiving evasive answers and suspect assurances from Treasury on February 4, U.S. Senator Jack Reed (D-RI), the Ranking Member of the Senate Appropriations Financial Services and General Government (FSGG) Subcommittee, which oversees funding for Treasury, fired off a follow up letter seeking more specific answers to determine exactly who from DOGE has been given access to what Treasury payment and information technology (IT) and what kind of vetting process those people have undergone.

Reed is particularly alarmed that Treasury officials equivocated in their response that members of DOGE “currently . . . will have read-only access to the coded data” of Treasury’s payment systems. Reed wants to know if anyone from DOGE previously had more access.

Senator Reed is also seeking to determine what level of access has been granted to Tom Krause, who is currently a big tech CEO and now serves as Elon Musk’s DOGE commander inside the Treasury Department. Does he have access beyond read-only?  While Mr. Krause was apparently granted some type of security clearance, Reed wants to know whether he received any actual vetting and whether other members of DOGE have a similar clearance? 

Senator Reed is also seeking to determine exactly what permissions DOGE employees have to review Americans’ most sensitive data, such as tax information.  While DOGE employees have access that is “similar” to the permissions provided to others with a need to review this data, such as auditors, that necessarily means that there are “differences,” too, which could have grave consequences for the privacy of all Americans.

Finally, Senator Reed is seeking information about DOGE attempts to block authorized spending to institutions that are politically disfavored by Trump and Elon Musk.  While Treasury asserts that no payments were “delayed or re-routed,” new reporting indicates that Treasury did, in fact, attempt to block payments.

Full text of the letter follows:

February 5, 2025

The Honorable Scott Bessent, Secretary

U.S. Department of the Treasury

1500 Pennsylvania Avenue NW

Washington, DC 20220

Dear Secretary Bessent: 

Thank you for the prompt response from your staff to my letter, dated February 3, 2025, regarding access to U.S. Treasury Department payment systems by surrogates of Elon Musk.  Regrettably, the letter did not address many of the specific questions I asked, and in fact, it raised additional issues that the Department should address.

Therefore, I respectfully request answers to several follow-up questions by February 10, 2025:

 

1.         The response letter states that “currently, Treasury staff members working with Tom Krause, a Treasury employee, will have read-only access to the coded data of the Fiscal Service’s payment systems.” 

a.         What access does Mr. Krause himself have to these systems?

b.         Did the access that you initially granted to Mr. Krause or these staff members include permissions beyond “read-only” or access to data with identifiable fields? 

c.         Are you evaluating whether to provide Mr. Krause and these staff members with additional permissions beyond “read-only” and access to coded data?

d.         How many Treasury staff members are working with Mr. Krause on this matter?

2.         The response letter states that “the review at the Fiscal Service has not caused payments for obligations such as Social Security and Medicare to be delayed or re-routed.” 

a.         Did Tom Krause, or any Treasury staff members working with him, ever attempt to delay or re-route any payments or inquire with career Treasury staff about how to do so?

b.         Can you commit that Treasury will not delay or re-route any statutorily directed payments?

3.         The response letter states that “Mr. Krause is subject to the same security obligations and ethical requirements [as other government employees], including a Top Secret security clearance.” 

a.         Was his clearance granted through the customary practices used for veteran, career Treasury staff members?

b.         Is his clearance at the level that is customary for the Fiscal Assistant Secretary, which I understand to be TS/SCI with a counterintelligence-scope polygraph?

4.         For the Treasury staff members working with Mr. Krause who currently have “read-only” access:

a.         Do they all have security clearances and if so, were these clearances granted through the customary practices used for veteran, career Treasury staff members?

b.         Are any of them foreign nationals?

c.         Are any of them designed as a “special government employee” and if so, how many have this designation?

5.         Have Mr. Krause and the Treasury staff members working with him submitted financial disclosure forms to the Office of Government Ethics?

Thank you for your attention to this matter, and I look forward to your prompt reply.

Sincerely,

-end-