SNAP Benefits play a crucial role in supporting millions of low-income Americans who face challenges affording food. The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) has recently set a deadline for states to comply with new work requirements for able-bodied adults without dependents. These new guidelines, stemming from the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA), will affect 42 million people across the country who rely on SNAP benefits.
According to Newsweek, the changes aim to tighten eligibility and compliance measures. While some believe these adjustments will reduce dependency on government assistance, others express concern over the potential impact on vulnerable populations.
Stricter SNAP Work Requirements: What’s Changing?
The changes to SNAP are mainly focused on narrowing eligibility for exemptions from the three-month time limit imposed on able-bodied adults without dependents (ABAWDs). Under the OBBBA, the exemption age for these adults has been raised from 59 to 65, ensuring more seniors can continue receiving SNAP benefits without meeting work requirements. However, this exemption change still applies specifically to ABAWDs—those without dependents and deemed able-bodied.
Moreover, the exemption for parents or guardians has been reduced. Previously, parents with children under the age of 18 could receive an exemption, but under the new rules, only parents of children under 14 are eligible for exemptions.
Further, exemptions for homeless individuals, veterans, and young adults under the age of 24 who have aged out of foster care have been completely removed. While certain exemptions remain for those who are pregnant or have physical or mental conditions that prevent them from working, the new rules are expected to impact a large number of recipients.
The USDA’s memo, issued on October 3, mandates that states comply with these new work requirements starting November 1, 2025. These rules require ABAWDs to either work, participate in job training, or volunteer in their communities for at least 20 hours per week. While states are responsible for administering SNAP, the federal government is setting firm guidelines, holding states accountable for ensuring compliance.
Impact on Rural Communities and Local Economies
The repercussions of these new SNAP rules could be far-reaching, especially for rural areas. According to the Food Action and Research Center, every dollar in SNAP benefits generates up to $1.80 in local economic activity.
Small grocers, farmers, and local businesses in rural areas heavily rely on SNAP purchases to stay afloat. Any reduction in SNAP benefits could severely disrupt these local economies, particularly in rural counties, where one in seven households relies on SNAP.
Rural communities already face higher rates of poverty and food insecurity than the national average, with many struggling to access reliable jobs or job training. With these new work requirements, some may find it even harder to comply, leading to potential economic stagnation in these areas.
In many rural regions, the infrastructure for job training or employment opportunities is limited, which only adds another layer of difficulty for individuals trying to comply with the new rules.
Brittany Christenson, CEO of AidKit, a public benefit corporation, explained to Newsweek that some people may lose benefits not because they refuse to work, but because they cannot meet documentation or compliance requirements.
Many families are facing invisible barriers to work, such as caregiving duties, lack of transportation, or health issues, which prevent them from fulfilling the new criteria. These barriers highlight the importance of flexibility in the system to provide lasting stability and self-sufficiency for low-income families.
Political Debate and Broader Implications
The recent changes to SNAP benefits are deeply political. Proponents of the new rules, including prominent figures such as Robert F. Kennedy Jr., Dr. Mehmet Oz, Brooke Rollins, and Scott Turner, argue that these policies will help empower able-bodied individuals, reduce dependency on government welfare programs, and protect taxpayers.
In a joint op-ed published in The New York Times, they emphasized the need for universal work requirements across welfare programs to encourage self-sufficiency, rebuild communities, and ensure that those who can work, do so.
However, critics of the new policies, such as the Food Action and Research Center, warn that these changes could harm vulnerable populations, particularly in rural areas. They argue that SNAP is one of the most effective anti-poverty programs in the U.S. and that cutting access could hurt local economies.
The organization called on Congress and the administration to reverse the provisions, restore flexibility to states, and reaffirm the nation’s commitment to ensuring every American can afford food. SNAP benefits, they argue, nurture local economies and should not be used as a tool for broader political agendas.
As the deadline for compliance approaches, it is clear that the debate over SNAP benefits is far from over. The future of the program may depend on how lawmakers and states adapt to the new requirements, and whether they will address the concerns of the people who rely on this crucial support.
