Millions of people who receive food stamps could soon see smaller benefits or even get kicked out of the program due to changes that are starting to roll out from the Republicans’ “big, beautiful” tax and spending law, according to several analyses from the federal government and public policy think tanks.
About 2.4 million people, or about 6% of enrollees, could lose access to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), in an average month, because of the new law’s changes, which include stricter work requirements, the Congressional Budget Office estimated last month.
Millions more will see their monthly benefit amounts shrink because of other changes mandated by the law, such as a new restrictions on how an individual’s benefits are calculated, it added. The total pool of people who will either be cut off from SNAP or see smaller monthly benefits could reach 22.3 million U.S. families, according to a July analysis from the Urban Institute.
About 42 million individuals in 22.3 million households received food stamps in 2023, according to a U.S. Department of Agriculture report on the program.
While SNAP is funded by the USDA, every U.S. state is in charge of administering the program to its residents, with those administrative costs split between the federal and state governments. Some states are already beginning to implement some of the new law’s food stamp restrictions, such as Pennsylvania, which is mandating the stricter work rules starting Nov. 1.
The changes are arriving at a precarious time for many, with grocery costs continuing to rise and poverty rates inching higher for senior citizens and Black Americans, according to new Census data. Anti-hunger advocates warn that reduced SNAP benefits could worsen food insecurity, undermining one of the nation’s most effective safety nets credited with lifting 3.6 million people out of poverty last year, according to U.S. Census data.
“We are deeply concerned that the cuts to SNAP will lead to an increase in hunger,” Carolyn Vega, associate director of policy analysis for Share Our Strength, an anti-hunger nonprofit, told CBS MoneyWatch. “You are looking at households that don’t have a lot of extra wiggle room in their budget, so that makes every SNAP dollar very precious in extending that food budget.”
Tracking the impact of those SNAP cuts on food insecurity as the changes unfurl over the coming months and years may be difficult, given the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Sept. 20 announcement that it is halting its annual Household Food Security Report, which measures whether American families have access to healthy food.
The USDA said it is nixing the report because it is “redundant, costly, politicized and extraneous” and leads to “fear mongering.” But anti-hunger advocates say scrapping the report could ultimately obscure the impact of the Republicans’ cuts to the food stamp program.
“I don’t see how it’s redundant — the USDA puts out the only report on food insecurity,” Vega said. “It just indicates to me that they don’t want to see the results of the reconciliation bill,” referring to the Republican’s “big, beautiful” tax and spending law.
The USDA didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment about that claim.
New work requirements
New work requirements for SNAP recipients are taking effect as the labor market stalls, raising the risk that more people could lose access to food stamps under the stricter rules mandated by the Republican law, advocates say.
“It’s a tough workforce right now, and the work requirements come without any support,” Gina Plata-Nino, a food stamp expert at the anti-hunger advocacy group Food Research & Action Center, told CBS MoneyWatch. “Our most vulnerable will have even less access to resources.”
The new work rules expand what the federal government considers so-called “able-bodied adults without dependents,” or ABAWDs, who are adults without young children who must prove they are either working, volunteering or engaged in an education or training program for at least 20 hours a week to qualify for food stamps.
Previously, the work requirements only applied to people between 18 to 54 years old, but the new law pushes that to age 64. Additionally, people who are former foster youth between 18 to 24 years old, veterans or homeless are no longer exempt from the work requirements, as they were previously.
People who don’t meet the work requirements will be limited to receiving food stamps for three months within a three-year period.
“Just off the bat, those are veterans, youths aging out of foster care — think about what it means to be unhoused, trying to get a job when you don’t have a place to shower,” Plata-Nino said. “Again, these populations are going to be worse off.”
Work requirements have been championed by Republican lawmakers because they say the rules encourage people to be gainfully employed or engaged in the community in exchange for food aid.
But anti-hunger advocates argue the rules often bump people off the program because they may face difficulties in filing paperwork. Others point out that low-income workers may struggle to get enough hours from their employers to meet the new federal requirements, especially given the proliferation of “just in time” scheduling, which slots workers into short shifts to reduce costs for employers.
Prior to the changes, most SNAP recipients who were required to work were doing so, according to the Center for Budget and Policy Priorities.
Stricter aid calculations
Under the new GOP tax and spending law, there are other changes going into the SNAP program that could reduce benefits for millions.
For instance, SNAP applicants can deduct their utility costs from their incomes when calculating their benefits, which can help to increase their food-stamp allotments. But the new law now prevents food-stamp recipients from counting internet expenses as part of their household costs when determining benefits. That change went into effect as soon as the law was signed on July 4 by President Trump.
“Roughly 65% of participating households will see their benefit drop by an average of $10 a month” because of the exclusion in using internet costs to calculate benefits, Vega said.
“It’s a relatively small amount but for a household facing rising grocery cost and facing tough decisions, $10 can make a difference,” she added.
Longer-term, there are additional changes that could strain states’ ability to provide food stamps, such as a shift in fiscal year 2027 requiring that states cover 75% of administrative costs, up from 50% now. Under the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, states with high error rates — such as over- and underpayments of SNAP benefits — will also need to provide more funding for the program, starting in 2028.
One concern, according to Vega, is whether states will have the financial resources to cover those additional costs.
“It’s uncharted territory,” she said. “We do worry some states might decide they can’t take that level of liability and won’t participate in SNAP.”
