How SNAP Cuts Might Impact Your Community

As Congress and the Trump administration consider significant cuts to SNAP, the Urban Institute has made a tool available that estimates the average gap between the maximum SNAP benefit and the average cost of a modestly priced meal in every state and county. Elaine Waxman, senior fellow in the Tax and Income Supports​ Division at Urban, and Poonam Gupta, research associate in the Tax and Income Supports​ Division, spoke with Spotlight recently about the tool. The transcript of that conversation has been lightly edited for length and clarity.

Elaine, can you give us some context behind why you wanted to compile this data at this moment?

Elaine Waxman: We actually did a first round of analysis in 2018 and that was also a period when there was a discussion about really significant cuts to SNAP. We were able to get data on food prices in every county in the U.S. from Nielsen and that’s how we started. And it was kind of a one-time snapshot in our minds. But then obviously, the pandemic hit, and food prices began to increase. And we wanted to understand more about what was happening to SNAP beneficiaries. And then in the middle of that we had the Thrifty Food Plan evaluation, which raised the overall benefits by 21%. And that was very important because that was the first time that it had been reevaluated since 2006. We found that when that 21% increase took place in 2021, it made a big difference, and it significantly reduced the number of counties where the maximum SNAP benefit did not match up with the cost of a moderately priced meal—we were down to about one in five counties where there was still a gap of some sort.

And then, higher food prices hit, which has been enormous for many Americans, as we haven’t had any kind of jolt like that since the seventies. So, we started looking at it again. And then the new administration has come in, along with the Republican Congress, and set this benchmark of potentially cutting $230 billion from SNAP. If that were to proceed, it’s hard to imagine a scenario where they don’t roll back the Thrifty Food Plan. So, we did a mini-version of what we’d been doing before, and what we found is that if those cuts were to go through, there is not a single county in the United States where a moderately priced meal can be covered by the maximum SNAP benefit. And overall, the gap is that food prices would be about 51% higher per meal than the maximum benefit.

And the reason we choose the maximum benefit is, there are not an insignificant number of people for whom SNAP is considered the primary source of food. People often talk about SNAP as a supplement, and that’s true. But for nearly four in 10, they don’t have any budget for food once you take off the expenses that are accounted for. And so, it does matter a lot if that maximum benefit is sufficient to meet those needs, and then everybody else’s SNAP benefits are adjusted off of that maximum benefit.

Poonam, would you like to add anything about the methodology?

Poonam Gupta: I’m happy to answer any maybe specific questions on methodology, but I think what’s most interesting about the methodology and what we do that’s kind of unique is there’s not often data available out there on how food prices differ at the county level. We know anecdotally that urban areas, for example, New York City or Los Angeles, have higher food prices than some rural areas. And SNAP benefits are not adjusted—other than Alaska and Hawaii, they’re the same across the contiguous 48. I think our value add is really just showing how stark some of those differences are in cities like New York, but there are also rural areas, perhaps that have high rates of travel, that for some reason or another also have really high food prices.

And has the tool always, since you started doing it, been set up as something that anyone can use if they want to look at their jurisdiction?

Gupta: Yes, and we also have prior versions of the tool that can allow you to look at different time periods.

And in this latest version, did you find that particular parts of the country would especially hard hit?

Waxman: I think the impact on rural areas was really striking. Nobody is surprised to hear that large urban areas are hard hit by food prices. But people are sometimes really not aware that food can be pretty expensive in rural areas. And as Poonam mentioned, one of the things that we’ve noticed over the several years that we’ve been doing this is that areas that are near tourist destinations that are rural tend to face higher food prices.

And the other issue that I think people underestimate is how much rural areas have to spend in terms of transportation and acquisition of food. And then of course, ironically, in some of the places that grow food, it’s expensive and food insecurity rates can be very high. Poonam, do you have some examples you would want to share that might be interesting?

Gupta: We have a list of the counties with the highest gaps and New York County is at the top of that list. But the county with the second highest gap is actually the small rural county in Michigan called Leelanau County, which is up by Traverse City. We also found that Teton County in Idaho, while not as rural as Leelanau County, also has really high food prices.

Editor’s note: The top 10 rural counties with the biggest gap between SNAP benefits and the cost of a moderately priced meal:

1. Teton County, ID (128% gap)
2. Dukes County, MA (116% gap)
3. Nantucket County, MA (116% gap)
4. Lincoln County, WY (115% gap)
5. Teton County, WY (115% gap)
6. Nevada County, CA (113% gap)
7. Sierra County, CA (113% gap)
8. Blaine County, ID (113% gap)
9. Camas County, ID (113% gap)
10. Custer County, ID (113% gap)

I’m guessing that most of those are red counties. We’re seeing that with a lot of the policies from the new administration, that they are really impacting areas that voted very enthusiastically for the second Trump administration.

Waxman: Yes, absolutely. And I think the other piece of information that we could share is from a different product that we released about a week ago. We’ve run a national wellbeing and basic needs survey since 2017 we refer to as WBNS. It runs every December, is a nationally representative sample of people 18 to 64, and we find consistently higher food insecurity rates than are typically reported by USDA. And what we’re finding is that food insecurity in 2024 plateaued at the same high rate it was at in 2023 and is continues to be well above the pandemic rates.

We also in that survey ask about the use of charitable food, which a lot of people combine with SNAP, and we found that about one in six households reported using charitable food during 2024. Which means we lost ground in terms of the achievements we had during the pandemic on reducing food insecurity, as food prices have remained high. So, another point we wanted to make is if you cut SNAP during this time when food insecurity and the use of charitable food persist at this very high level, that tells you something about potential impact.

And the thing about rolling back the Thrifty Food Plan is that it would affect all people who take SNAP. Some of the proposals, such as changing work requirements or changing broad based categorical eligibility, affect certain groups. But if you roll back the Thrifty Food Plan, it impacts everyone who receives benefits. I think people also don’t understand the potential economic impact of SNAP cuts, particularly when you’re in a slowing economy or an economy on the edge of a downturn. Using SNAP benefits is an economic stimulus, and I don’t think people realize how it can affect your local economy. SNAP dollars get spent right away and they pay for stock people and cashiers and producers. It’s one of these programs that regardless of whether people are participating in it, they would feel the effect of significant cuts.

And just parenthetically, wasn’t the Thrifty Food plan due to be reevaluated this year in any case?

Waxman: That’s a really good question. In 2018, which was the last time we actually had a Farm Bill, a plan was established for the Thrifty Food Plan to be reevaluated every five years. There was an initial re-evaluation in 2021, so theoretically, the next one should be coming in 2026.

Poonam, in terms of updating this data, what’s your plan for doing that?

We’re excited for another update that we do plan on making this year. As Elaine mentioned previously, we were using the 2023 data that we have on food prices, which at this point is a little bit outdated. We get that data on a little bit of a lag, and in the next month or so, we plan on getting updated data on food prices for 2024.