SNAP RESTRICTIONS SOW CONFUSION

New SNAP restrictions have had a significant impact throughout Michigan and the country

The One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA) introduces significant changes to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) that will affect thousands of Michigan residents. While the stated goal is to increase workforce participation and improve program accountability, the legislation narrows eligibility requirements and shifts additional financial responsibility to states. These changes represent a fundamental shift in how food assistance is administered and who is expected to qualify for support.

• Families who received SNAP for kids under 18 yrs old now only get SNAP for kids under 14 years old

• Homeless and veteran individuals no longer automatically qualify for SNAP

•The senior qualifying age for Food Stamps was changed from 55 to 65 years old

These changes highlight an expectation that people aged 14-65 are expected to be working, as opposed to 18-55.

 (Sec. 10105 of OBBBA) establishes state-matching fund requirements for the cost of SNAP program allotments beginning in FY2028. The state contribution ranges from 0% to 15% for the cost of SNAP program allotments and is based on the state’s SNAP 15% payment error rate. Currently, the state match is 0%.

Currently, USDA must pay 50% of all administrative costs, thus this section increases the state share of administrative costs from 50% to 75%.

What’s more, the state of Michigan is currently shifting funding priorities to reduce their error rate (a new requirement) thereby pulling funding from Michigan residents today.

Taken together, these policy changes reflect a new federal expectation that most individuals between the ages of 14 and 65 should be participating in the workforce to maintain access to food assistance. At the same time, Michigan is being required to assume greater financial responsibility for both SNAP benefits and administrative costs, with future funding tied to state error rates. As Michigan redirects resources to comply with these new requirements, concerns remain that investments intended to reduce future penalties may come at the expense of services and support available to vulnerable residents today.