The Trump administration’s overhaul of the nation’s largest food aid program will result in millions losing benefits, strain state budgets and strain the nation’s food supply chain, according to researchers and former federal officials.
Permanent changes to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program come regardless of the outcome of at least two federal lawsuits seeking to prevent the government from ending November SNAP benefits. The lawsuits challenge the Trump administration’s refusal to release emergency funds to keep the program running during the government shutdown.
A federal judge in Rhode Island ordered the government to use those funds to continue SNAP. A Massachusetts judge in a separate lawsuit also said the government must use emergency food aid funds to pay for SNAP, but gave the Trump administration until Nov. 3 to come up with a plan.
Amid this uncertainty, food banks across the U.S. are bracing for an increase in demand, with the possibility that millions of people could be cut off from the food program that helps them buy groceries.
On October 28, a truckload of SpaghettiOs, tuna and other groceries arrived at the Gateway Food Pantry in Arnold, Missouri. It may be Gateway’s last mission for a while. The south St. Louis food pantry largely serves families with school-aged children, but has already exhausted its annual food budget due to increased demand, said executive director Patrick McKelvey.
New Disabled South, a Georgia-based nonprofit that supports people with disabilities, announced that it is offering one-time payments of $100 to $250 to individuals and families expected to lose SNAP benefits in the 14 states it serves.
Less than 48 hours later, the nonprofit had received more than 16,000 requests totaling $3.6 million, largely from families, far more than the organization had funded.
“It’s unreal,” co-founder Dom Kelly said.
The threat of delaying SNAP funding is a preview of what’s to come when changes to the program included in the One Big Beautiful Bill signed by President Donald Trump in July take effect.
The Domestic Tax and Spend Act cuts $187 billion over the next decade from SNAP. That’s a nearly 20 percent decrease from current funding levels, according to the Congressional Budget Office.
The new rules shift many food and administrative costs to states, which may lead some to consider pulling out of the program, which helped about 42 million people buy groceries last year. Regardless of the new law, the administration is also pushing states to limit SNAP purchases by banning things like candy and soda.
All of this “puts us in uncharted territory for SNAP,” said Cindy Long, a former deputy assistant secretary at the Department of Agriculture who is now national counsel at the law firm Manatt, Phelps & Phillips.
The nation’s first food stamps were issued at the end of the Great Depression, when the poverty-stricken population could not buy the products of farmers. Today, instead of stamps, recipients use debit cards. But the program still lifts farmers and food retailers and prevents hunger during the economic downturn.
CBO estimates that about 3 million people will lose food assistance as a result of several provisions of the budget law, including applying work requirements to more people and shifting more costs to states. Trump administration leaders have championed the changes as a way to reduce waste, put more people to work and improve health.
This is the largest SNAP cut in its history and comes amid rising food prices and a fragile labor market.
The exact number of cuts will be difficult to gauge because the Trump administration ended an annual report that measures food insecurity.
Here are five big changes coming to SNAP and what they mean for Americans’ health:
1. Do you want benefits from food? They will be more difficult to obtain.
Under the new law, people will have to submit more paperwork to access SNAP benefits.
Many recipients are already required to work, volunteer or participate in other eligible activities for 80 hours a month to receive money on their benefit cards. The new law expands those requirements to previously excluded groups, including the homeless, veterans and youth who were in foster care when they turned 18. The expanded work requirements also apply to parents with children 14 and older and adults ages 55 to 64.
Beginning Nov. 1, if recipients do not document each month that they meet the requirements, they will be limited to three months of SNAP benefits over a three-year period.
“This is draconian,” said Elaine Waxman, a senior fellow at the Urban Institute, a nonprofit research group. About 1 in 8 adults reported losing SNAP benefits because they had trouble filing their paperwork, according to a December Urban Institute survey.
Some refugees, asylum seekers and other legal immigrants are excluded from SNAP entirely under the new law.
2. States should raise more money and resources.
The federal law drastically increases the amount each state will have to pay to maintain the program.
Until now, states have only had to pay half of the administrative costs and none of the food costs, with the rest covered by the federal government.
Under the new law, states bear 75% of administrative costs and must cover a portion of food costs. That corresponds to an estimated average cost increase for states of more than 200 percent, according to a report by the Georgetown Center on Poverty and Inequality.
A KFF Health News analysis shows that a single funding shift related to food costs could put states on the hook for an additional $11 billion.
All states participate in the SNAP program, but could opt out. In June, nearly two dozen Democratic governors wrote to congressional leaders warning that some states would not be able to find the money to continue the program.
“If states are forced to end SNAP programs, hunger and poverty will increase, children and adults will get sicker, rural grocery stores will struggle to stay open, people in agriculture and the food industry will lose jobs, and state and local economies will suffer,” the governors wrote.
3. Will the changes lead to healthier eating?
The Trump administration, through its “Make America Healthy Again” platform, has made healthy eating a priority.
Secretary of Health and Human Services Robert F. Kennedy Jr. supported restrictions on purchases of soft drinks and candy under the food aid program. To date, 12 states have received approval to limit what people can buy with SNAP dollars.
Federal officials have previously blocked such restrictions because they are difficult for states and stores to implement and add to the stigma around SNAP, according to a 2007 USDA report. In 2018, the first Trump administration rejected an effort by Maine to ban sugary drinks and sweets.
A store may decide the hassle isn’t worth participating in the program and drop out, leaving SNAP recipients with fewer places to shop.
People who receive SNAP are no more likely to buy sweet or salty snacks than people who shop without the benefits, according to the USDA. Research shows that encouraging healthy food choices is more effective than regulating markets.
When people have less money to spend on food, they often turn to cheaper, unhealthier alternatives that keep them full longer, rather than paying for more expensive foods that are healthy and fresh but quickly spoil.
4. How will SNAP cuts affect health?
Advocacy groups working to end hunger in the country say the cuts will have long-term health effects.
Research has found that children in households with limited access to food are more likely to have a mental disorder. Similarly, food insecurity is associated with lower math and reading skills.
Food-insecure working-age people are more likely to develop chronic disease. This long list includes high blood pressure, arthritis, diabetes, asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.
These health issues come at a cost to individuals. Low-income adults who do not participate in SNAP spend an average of $1,400 more per year on health care than those who do.
About 47 million people lived in households with limited or uncertain access to food in 2023.
5. What does this mean for the country’s food supply chain?
SNAP spending directly supports grocers, their suppliers, and the transportation and agriculture industries. In addition, when low-income households have help accessing food, they are more likely to spend money on other needs, such as prescriptions or car repairs. All of this means that every dollar spent through SNAP generates at least $1.50 in economic activity, according to the USDA.
A report by associations representing convenience stores, grocers and the food industry estimated that it could cost grocers $1.6 billion to comply with the new SNAP restrictions.
Advocates warn that stores may pass the cost on to shoppers or may close.
