October ushers in changes to SNAP, the government’s supplemental nutrition assistance program, including one shift Americans may see immediately and another one that could determine the program’s fate and benefits in coming years, analysts said.
Most Americans on SNAP, formerly called food stamps, will see a small bump in their benefits from the annual cost-of-living adjustment, or COLA. In the 48 contiguous states plus Washington, DC, a family of three will see maximum monthly SNAP payments rise by $23. For a family of four they’ll rise $29. A family of five will see a $34 increase. Singles will see an $8 rise. Maximum benefit amounts are different in Alaska, Hawaii, Guam and the U.S. Virgin Islands, because of higher prices for groceries.
While that’s welcome news for the roughly 37 million lower-income Americans receiving the benefits, there’s less to cheer for states grappling to continue supporting the food program, analysts said. Under President Donald Trump’s signature tax and spending law passed last year, state governments will now be responsible for 75%, instead of 50%, of SNAP administrative costs, beginning Oct. 1.
That change isn’t necessarily visible to SNAP recipients now, but the increased costs will strain state budgets at a time they should be investing in the program to prevent future cuts due to costs from new federal requirements, analysts said. Starting Oct. 1, 2027, most states will be required to pay a portion of benefit costs for the first time ever. What each state must pay in that first year will depend on the state’s “error rate,” measuring how accurately state agencies determine eligibility and benefit amounts for participants, including both overpayments and underpayments to households.
“Demanding that states do much more on SNAP operations to drive a better result at the same time the federal government is cutting back on its financial responsibilities to states and federal staffing isn’t just counterintuitive, it’s cynical policy,” said Stacy Dean, executive director of Global Food Institute’s Carbonell Family at George Washington University.
What’s at Stake for SNAP?
Counties that are required to contribute to the nonfederal share of SNAP administration costs that go into effect on Oct. 1 may face up to an $850 million increase in annual obligations, according to the National Association of Counties.
Most states have budgeted to shoulder the increase in administrative costs, but “I’m most worried about states that have not allocated funding because of the impact of error rates” ahead, said Carolyn Vega, associate director of policy analysis at No Kid Hungry, a nonprofit dedicated to ending childhood hunger in the United States. “They’ll have to do the same with a lot less.”
The potentially budget-busting cost-sharing based on error rates could force states and local governments to consider trade-offs, said Tim Shaw, director of the Benefits Transformation Initiative at the Aspen Institute’s Financial Security Program. States are estimated to be on the hook for between $15 million and $1.5 billion, according to nonprofit Farm Aid, which supports farmers.
“Most states knew the 75% administrative cost was coming and budgeted for it. But in the longer term, pressure on budgets will increase and states will have to make tough choices,” he said. “States will have less leeway to deliver benefits so there may be fewer technological improvements, longer wait times for call centers and more complications to get SNAP.”
The result could be fewer SNAP participants, analysts said. Already, SNAP has lost more than 4.7 million people nationwide since July 2025, according to data through March from the U.S. Department of Agriculture. Arizona led the decline, losing nearly half its participants — partly due to new work requirements, bars on immigrants receiving assistance and shifting costs to states.
“There’s a scenario in which states could say the program costs too much and they can’t pay and bow out of SNAP,” Vega said. “State agencies have said that option could be on the table.”
If that happens, food pantries and nonprofits may have to pick up the slack. A record number of Arizonans visited food banks, according to the Arizona Food Bank Network, a statewide organization that works with local pantries. About 843,000 Arizonans collected from a food pantry in April, up about 8% from the year prior and surpassing the number of people receiving SNAP, AFBN data show.
Pain extends beyond SNAP
What happens with SNAP may not stay in SNAP, analysts said. Increased SNAP costs could have trickle-down effects.
For instance, students living in households participating in SNAP are directly certified for school meals. If parents lose SNAP, 832,000 students could lose free school meals or would have to complete separate forms to receive them, according to research from the nonprofit, nonpartisan Urban Institute. Further, any decrease in SNAP participation among school-age children could affect individual student eligibility and increase the cost of providing universal school meals.
Higher SNAP costs could also force states to find ways to keep budgets under control, analysts said. Options could include, according to NAC:
- Cut or scale back critical services, including public health, nutrition, emergency response and rural development
- Raise local taxes or fees to cover new costs
- Delay or cancel infrastructure and other investments
- Absorb long-term economic and social consequences of underfunded programs
“SNAP administration has traditionally been a shared federal-state responsibility where both partners work together to drive positive change,” Dean said. “What’s happening now is the federal government is both driving a crisis and leaving states to deal with it.”
What Can Be Done?
Short of repealing SNAP changes, advocates said they’re asking for at least a pause in the cost-sharing to give states time to make adjustments.
“We are advocating for at least a two-year delay of benefits cost-sharing through the Farm Bill,” Vega said.
The Senate Agriculture Committee’s latest Farm Bill that passed committee this month proposes pushing the start of state benefit cost-sharing back by one year, to Oct. 1, 2028 (Fiscal Year 2029). To offset that extension, though, it increased the penalty for states whose error rates are highest.
Medora Lee is a money, markets and personal finance reporter at USA TODAY. You can reach her at [email protected] and subscribe to our free Daily Money newsletter for personal finance tips and business news every Monday through Friday morning.
Reporting by Medora Lee, USA TODAY / USA TODAY. USA TODAY Network via Reuters Connect.
Read the full article here
