CHICAGO — As President Donald Trump pushes forward his ambitious “One Big Beautiful Bill” tax overhaul, new details reveal that Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits — a vital lifeline for over 42 million low-income Americans — may face historic cuts.
While Trump’s plan is framed as a broad tax reduction effort, it comes at the cost of $295 billion in federal SNAP spending over the next decade, according to the Congressional Budget Office (CBO). The proposed changes could reshape who gets food assistance, how much they get, and which government — federal or state — foots the bill.
What SNAP Does Today
SNAP, formerly known as food stamps, provides monthly funds to eligible low-income individuals and families for purchasing groceries. In February 2025, the program served over 42 million people, across nearly 22.5 million households, with an average monthly benefit of $353 per household. That’s about one in every eight Americans relying on SNAP to meet basic nutritional needs.
The current rules exempt participants from paying for benefits and allow them to buy most food items, although six states — including Indiana and Iowa — have already been approved to exclude certain products like candy and soda.
Key Changes Under Trump’s Plan
The proposed legislation brings a sweeping shift in how SNAP is funded and administered:
1. States Take On More Cost
Currently, the federal government pays for all food benefits and shares administrative costs with states. Trump’s plan would require states to:
-
Cover 75% of SNAP’s administrative costs
-
Pay at least 5% of food aid, starting in 2028
-
Pay up to 25% if they have high benefit error rates
Given that only three states had error rates below 5% in 2023, most states could face increased financial burdens. With an 11.7% national error rate, many may struggle to keep up.
2. Expanded Work Requirements
Under current law, able-bodied adults aged 18–54 without dependents must work, volunteer, or attend job training at least 80 hours per month to qualify for ongoing benefits. Those who fail to meet this threshold can only receive SNAP for three months within a three-year period.
Trump’s bill would expand these requirements:
-
Include adults up to age 64
-
Apply to parents without children under age 7
-
Limit states’ ability to waive requirements in areas with high unemployment
The CBO estimates this alone will force 3.2 million people off the program every month on average.
3. Cuts for Immigrants
Another provision would eliminate SNAP benefits for between 120,000 and 250,000 immigrants who are lawfully present in the U.S. but not citizens or permanent residents. These cuts would disproportionately impact working immigrant families who rely on supplemental support.
4. Cap on Benefit Increases
The legislation proposes to cap inflation-based increases to food benefits. By 2034, the average household’s monthly benefit would be $15 lower than it would be under current law — further shrinking purchasing power amid rising grocery costs.
The Political Stakes
The bill passed the House by a single vote: 215–214. It now faces scrutiny in the Senate, where moderate Republicans and all Democrats are likely to question the aggressive cuts to essential safety net programs.
Trump has demanded the bill land on his desk by July 4, coinciding with the U.S.’s 249th Independence Day celebration — making the legislation symbolic as well as strategic. Supporters of the bill argue it will cut waste, encourage work, and restore state-level control. Opponents, however, warn of devastating consequences for vulnerable households.
Impact on Illinois and Other States
For states like Illinois — already grappling with budget pressures — the potential cost shift could mean difficult decisions:
-
Raise taxes or reallocate funds to cover SNAP’s new state share
-
Cut benefits, especially for working poor families
-
Restrict access through stricter eligibility enforcement
Given that most states would face higher administrative and benefit costs, many experts believe the overall SNAP participation rate will drop significantly, not just due to stricter rules but because states may simply choose not to absorb the new costs.
Why This Matters
At its core, this debate is not just about tax cuts. It’s about who pays for hunger relief in America, and what happens when millions of low-income Americans — many of whom are children, elderly, or disabled — suddenly lose access to food aid.
Local food banks, already stretched thin post-pandemic, fear they will be unable to fill the gap if benefits are slashed. As one Illinois food policy advocate put it:
“We’re not just cutting paperwork — we’re cutting dinner off someone’s table.”
What Comes Next?
As the Senate continues to debate the bill, advocacy groups are urging residents to contact their lawmakers. In the meantime, those receiving SNAP are being advised to:
-
Stay informed through state agencies
-
Document work hours or training in anticipation of expanded requirements
-
Explore local aid options in case of disruptions
With a looming July 4 deadline and billions on the line, the stakes for America’s food security — especially in states like Illinois — have rarely been higher.
Should states shoulder more of the burden for food assistance? Are stricter work requirements the answer — or a deeper problem?
Share your thoughts in the comments below on ChicagoSuburbanFamily.com.
