The SNAP Food Assistance Program Is Changing Again — Here’s What That Means for Families

In a time when grocery costs are already rising to historic levels, millions of American households will feel a considerable strain on their ability to access nutritious food due to the recent passage of H.R.1, otherwise called the “One Big Beautiful Bill Act.” Included in this bill are devastating cuts to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP. Once known as food stamps, it’s easily been the most impactful program to combat food insecurity in the U.S. for decades. The new legislation is putting that — and people’s lives — in jeopardy.

These changes are among the most drastic since the program was created during the Great Depression, according to the New York Times, with cuts that effectively shift responsibility (aka funding) from the federal level to the state, while making it more difficult for millions of current benefit holders to qualify for this life-saving program. 

Chances are, you know someone who has benefited from this program. In fact, 2024 had more than 41 million participants alone. To put it in perspective, that is roughly the current population of Canada. But even if you don’t, SNAP benefits affect all of us — not just those who enroll in these statewide programs. 

As you might expect, these cuts are upending how social programs will function for many years to come. So I chatted with six state representatives from New Mexico all the way to New York to get a sampling of what these changes will look like as well as when they’re scheduled to go into effect. 

The proposed changes to SNAP benefits under the “One Big Beautiful Bill Act” will impact programs nationwide, no matter which state you live in. Many states are now debating whether they can continue offering these essential services at all. 

• Stricter Work Requirements: Previously, there were exemptions for homeless individuals, veterans, and those aging out of foster care, which will now be eliminated. In addition, the upper age limit for work requirements has also been raised from 55 to 64. 
• Reduced Child Exemption: Prior to the law’s passing, the work hour exemption applied to caregivers of children 18 and under. It will now apply to caregivers of children under 14 going forward. (In the state of North Carolina alone, an estimated 90,000 adults could lose access to benefits due to this workplace requirement, according to projections from the state’s department of health and human services.) 
• New Non-Citizen Restrictions: The shift in eligibility requirements means that refugees, asylum seekers, and other non-citizens will lose access to benefits immediately. Lawful permanent residents and green card holders (among a few other select groups), however, remain eligible for SNAP benefits.  
• States’ Financial Responsibility Increases: The cost-share for administering the program will shift from a 50/50 state-federal split to 75/25, which will significantly increase the state’s financial responsibilities and strain administrative budgets and capacities for other services. (Unlike the federal government, states are required to operate with a balanced budget every year.)
• SNAP-Ed Program Eliminated: This program, which provides federal funding for nutrition education and obesity prevention programs, has been cut entirely. 
• Stricter Payment Error Rate (PER) Penalties: States with error rates of 6% or more will also be required to pay a penalty (in addition to the increased administrative fees stated above), which will increase state pressure to maintain strict compliance and accuracy. As of now, all but eight states exceeded the 6% threshold. In New Mexico, which is one of the states with the highest error rates, one in five residents receive SNAP benefits, so this change alone would cost the state upwards of $153 million dollars annually.

Across states, every representative I interviewed is already assessing the potential impacts and estimates of how they can maintain access to their programs. This will likely force states to make significant cuts across other social programs to cover increased operating costs. States are scrambling to reallocate funding to prevent people from losing their benefits entirely.

In the case of Vermont’s Agency of Human Services, this will involve using discretionary exemptions to extend benefit access, updating systems to improve accuracy (which will save states money due to the payment error rate penalty), increased outreach to participants informing them of new workplace requirements, or cutting other programs to compensate. 

The latest federal cuts to SNAP will cause critical public health issues at both the state and national level, explains Kim Johnson, the secretary of the California Health & Human Services Agency — whether they use SNAP benefits or not. (Many other department heads agreed.) “Weakening them weakens all of us,” she says.

These are just a few of the ripple effects that all of the state leaders interviewed are anticipating due to the new law.

• Decreased Access to Healthy Eating Programming: Nutrition and obesity prevention efforts could be affected due to the immediate end of the SNAP-Ed program, which includes funding for school gardens, chronic disease awareness programming, and access to healthy meals and snacks in schools. 
• Less Economic Activity: According to the USDA, every $1 invested in SNAP benefits generates up to $1.50 for local economies. With fewer benefits to go around, benefit-holders will have less to spend at the thousands of SNAP retailers across the country. As a result, communities, farmers, and food distribution systems will also suffer due to the decrease in economic activity, especially those in rural areas and smaller towns.
• Reduced Utility Benefits: On top of reduced benefit amounts for food, households may also see a reduction in benefit amounts for their utility costs (the law will enact changes in how utility costs are calculated), making many ineligible to qualify for the Standard Utility Allowance. 
• Strained Social Services: The increased financial and administrative burden on the state could impact the delivery and funding of all social programs, including mental health services, healthcare assistance, childcare, and job training.  

All states will experience these changes in stages, with most coming into effect before or by the year 2028. According to Miranda Gray, who is the division deputy commission for Vermont’s Department for Children and Families, the general timeline is as follows:

• Immediately after passage of the law, the SNAP-Ed program ended.
• November 1, 2025 is when work requirements are applied; the effects will begin impacting some households after February 2026.
• October 1, 2026 is when the shift in administrative cost share (from 50/50 state-federal support to 75/25) will take effect. 
• In 2028, states will begin paying for Payment Error Rate (PER) penalties, which are tied to the eligibility accuracy per state.