SNAP

SNAP is the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, the federal program that pays a monthly benefit for buying food. It is authorized by the Food and Nutrition Act of 2008, funded federally, administered by each state, and run at the federal level by the Food and Nutrition Administration, an agency of the Department of Agriculture that was called the Food and Nutrition Service until June 1, 2026. The benefit is loaded onto an electronic benefit transfer card and spent at authorized retailers.

"Food stamps" was the program's name until 2008 and remains what most people search for. The current name is the accurate one, and the change was not cosmetic: the program had already moved from paper coupons to an electronic card, and "nutrition assistance" describes a benefit that supplements a household's own food spending rather than covering it.

Three tests, and the one most sources describe wrongly. 7 USC 2014(c) sets the income standards, adjusted each October 1, and it does not apply the same test to every household. A household is ineligible if its income after the statutory exclusions and deductions exceeds the poverty line, which is the net test at 100 percent, and that test applies to everyone. Separately, a household that does not include an elderly or disabled member is ineligible if its income after exclusions but before deductions exceeds the poverty line by more than 30 percent, which is the familiar gross test at 130 percent. The consequence is usually stated backwards: a household with an elderly or disabled member is not given a higher gross limit, it is exempt from the gross test altogether. There is also a resource test at 7 USC 2014(g), which starts from a statutory $2,000, or $3,000 for a household including an elderly or disabled member, and has been adjusted every October since 2008, rounded down to the nearest $250.

Two exits from those tests, and both are routinely left out. First, 7 USC 2014(a) provides that a household in which every member receives TANF, SSI or the older state aid programs "shall be eligible to participate" regardless of the income and resource tests, which is why an application from a household already on one of those programs is a much shorter process. Second, the eligibility framework is federal but it is not uniform: 7 USC 2014(g)(6), implemented at 7 CFR 273.8(e)(19), lets a state disregard, at its option, any resource it already disregards for TANF cash assistance or Medicaid, and a parallel option applies to vehicles. So whether a household's savings count against it is a question with a state-level answer, and "the resource limit is $X" is only the federal default.

The 165 percent figure is a different rule. It appears in 7 USC 2012(m)(3), which allows someone aged 60 or over who cannot purchase food and prepare meals because of a physician-certified permanent disability to be treated, together with their spouse, as a separate household from the others they live with, and therefore to qualify on their own income. The condition is that the income of those others, excluding the spouse, does not exceed the poverty line by more than 65 percent. It is a household-definition rule, not an income limit, and it matters to multigenerational households, where the alternative is that a whole extended household's income is counted against one older member's application.

How the benefit is computed, which answers "why did I get less than the maximum". 7 USC 2017(a) sets the allotment at the cost of the thrifty food plan for the household's size, reduced by 30 percent of the household's net income, rounded down to the whole dollar. So a household with no countable net income receives the maximum and every other household receives less, on the assumption that a household can spend about 30 percent of its own net income on food. Deductions therefore matter twice: they decide eligibility under the net test, and they raise the benefit by lowering the figure the 30 percent applies to. The statute sets a 20 percent deduction from earned income, a dependent care deduction, and further deductions including one for shelter costs above a threshold.

What the thrifty food plan is, and why the household sizes look odd. 7 USC 2012(u) defines it as the diet required to feed a family of four consisting of a man and a woman aged 20 through 50, a child aged 6 through 8 and a child aged 9 through 11, and states that its cost "shall be the basis for uniform allotments for all households, regardless of the actual composition of the household." Other household sizes are then set as fixed percentages of that four-person figure: 30 percent for one person, 55 for two, 79 for three, 100 for four, 119 for five, 143 for six, 158 for seven, 180 for eight, and 22 percentage points per additional person up to 200. That is why a one-person maximum is not a quarter of the four-person maximum. The cost is adjusted every October 1 for the change in the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers over the twelve months ending in June, and the market baskets themselves may not be re-evaluated before October 1, 2027, with any re-evaluation required to be cost-neutral.

The work requirement, which was rewritten in 2025 and is the highest-stakes thing on this page. 7 USC 2015(o)(2) makes an individual ineligible if, during the preceding 36 months, they received benefits for three months or more without working or participating in a work program for at least 20 hours a week, averaged monthly. Public Law 119-21 struck the previous list of exceptions in its entirety and replaced it, so the current exceptions at (o)(3) are: under 18 or over 65 years of age; medically certified as physically or mentally unfit for employment; a parent or other household member responsible for a dependent child under 14 years of age; otherwise exempt under subsection (d)(2); pregnant; an Indian or Urban Indian as defined in title 25; or a California Indian described in section 1679(a) of title 25. Eligibility can be regained under (o)(5) by working or participating for 80 hours in a 30-day period, after which a further consecutive three-month period is available on loss of employment, limited to one such period in any 36 months. States may request waivers for areas with an unemployment rate over 10 percent, or in a noncontiguous state at or above one and a half times the national rate.

A serious caution attaches to that paragraph. Several widely published exceptions, including ones for veterans, for people experiencing homelessness, and for young adults formerly in foster care, are not in the current statute, and the age ceiling in the current text is 65 rather than the lower figure that circulated for years. Because a person who believes they are exempt and is not loses benefits after three months, the statute rather than any summary is the thing to check, and a caseworker in the administering state is the person who applies it.

Non-citizen eligibility was also rewritten by the same statute. 7 USC 2015(f) now limits participation to a resident of the United States who is a citizen or national, an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence, a Cuban and Haitian entrant, or an individual lawfully residing under a Compact of Free Association. Whether other statuses reach eligibility by a different route is a question this page deliberately does not answer, because the answer turns on provisions outside the Food and Nutrition Act.

What SNAP can buy is set federally, but a state can be authorized to differ. 7 USC 2012(k) defines eligible food as food for home consumption, and the exclusions are in the definition itself: alcoholic beverages, tobacco, and hot foods ready for immediate consumption. The agency adds that supplements, live animals and non-food items such as pet food, cleaning supplies and cosmetics are also out. Separately, 7 USC 2026(b)(1)(A) lets the Secretary run pilot or experimental projects and "waive any requirement of this chapter to the extent necessary for the project to be conducted," so an approved state project can make one state's rules differ from the federal baseline. Anyone relying on a specific item should check the current federal list and the administering state agency rather than a general summary.

The application sequence, in the order a state agency works through it.

1. The household is defined. People who buy food and prepare meals together are generally one household. Spouses, and parents with children 21 or younger living with them, are treated as one household even if they do not.

2. Gross income is counted, with statutory exclusions applied. For a household without an elderly or disabled member, this figure is compared to the poverty line plus 30 percent.

3. Deductions are applied to reach net income. A standard deduction, 20 percent of earned income, dependent care, and excess shelter costs are the main ones. Net income is compared to the poverty line.

4. Countable resources are compared to the limit. The home a household lives in is not counted.

5. The allotment is computed. Maximum allotment for the household size, minus 30 percent of net income, rounded down.

6. Certification runs for a set period and then has to be renewed. Changes in income and household composition have to be reported during it.

A hypothetical example of the 30 percent formula, using a round maximum rather than any published figure. Suppose a three-person household's maximum allotment is $700 and its counted net income after all deductions is $900 a month. Thirty percent of $900 is $270. The allotment is $700 minus $270, which is $430. If a documented child care expense reduces net income to $700, the reduction becomes $210 and the allotment rises to $490. The $200 of extra deduction produced $60 of extra benefit, which is the 30 percent working in reverse.

Pros

• The benefit is not taxable and, by statute, cannot be counted as income or resources under any other federal, state or local program.
• Deductions are generous enough to matter, and documenting shelter and dependent care costs raises the benefit as well as helping with eligibility.
• Households with an elderly or disabled member are exempt from the gross income test entirely, and a member over 60 with a certified disability can sometimes be treated as a separate household.
• A household in which every member already receives TANF or SSI is eligible without going through the income tests at all.

Cons

• The resource test counts savings by default, so a household that has built a small reserve can be refused in a state that has not exercised the option to disregard them.
• The work requirement produces a three-month cutoff, and several exceptions still published in circulating summaries were repealed in 2025.
• Because the benefit falls by 30 cents for each dollar of net income, it phases out alongside other benefits and contributes to a high effective rate on additional earnings.
• Administration is state-level, so processing times, interview requirements and reporting rules vary widely.
• The federal list of eligible food is narrower than "groceries", and because the Act lets the Secretary waive its requirements for an approved state project, one state's rules can differ from the federal baseline.