States Enforce 80-Hour SNAP Work Rules, Push Welfare Reform

I’ll explain what changed, cite the projected impact, describe how incentives are shifting, outline practical implications for taxpayers and recipients, and note what’s still left to do on welfare reform.

The federal Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, has been overdue for reform and states are now enforcing tougher rules intended to push able-bodied adults back into work. For years the focus from some quarters was on enrollment numbers as a measure of success, but growing concern about long-term dependency and program cost has shifted the conversation to outcomes. New requirements aim to make assistance temporary and directed toward people who genuinely cannot support themselves.

Starting recently, adults 18 to 64 without dependent children who can work must either work, join employment and training programs, or volunteer at least 80 hours per month to keep SNAP benefits. Those who fail to meet the threshold can receive benefits for just three months in any three-year period. The changes expand work rules to additional groups that previously had exemptions, and remove certain exemptions that had sheltered veterans, homeless people, and some former foster youth.

New work requirements are expanding across more states Sunday for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, the nation’s largest federal assistance program.

Starting today, adults between the ages of 18 and 64 without dependent children must work, participate in employment and training programs, or volunteer at least 80 hours per month to be eligible to receive SNAP benefits. Those who do not meet the requirement can receive benefits for only three months within a three-year period.

The new requirements expand work rules to additional groups that were previously exempt, including adults ages 55 to 64 and parents with children ages 14 or older. The law also eliminates prior exemptions for veterans, homeless people and individuals ages 18 to 24 who were in foster care when they turned 18, according to federal guidance.

The changes stem from provisions included in the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which President Donald Trump signed into law last summer.

Those policy specifics matter because they change incentives. If someone is physically and mentally capable of working, the program now expects participation in work or training as a condition of continued aid. That shifts SNAP from a passive benefit toward a bridge back to independence, and it encourages states to connect recipients with actual job opportunities and useful skills.

The Congressional Budget Office estimates the provisions will reduce SNAP participation by roughly 2.4 million people over the next decade. Changes to benefit calculations and caps on future increases are also designed to slow program growth and reduce long-term fiscal pressure. The reforms are projected to trim benefit levels for many households over time, even among those who remain eligible.

The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimates that the new provisions will reduce SNAP participation by an estimated 2.4 million people over the next 10 years. About a third of those affected are able-bodied adults ages 18 to 64 without dependent children, while roughly 300,000 are able-bodied adults in that age range who live with children ages 14 or older.

Beyond work requirements, the law also makes broader changes to SNAP that will affect benefit levels for many households, including limits on future benefit increases and changes to how certain living expenses are counted when calculating monthly aid, according to the CBO. Those provisions are expected to result in smaller benefit amounts over time, even for some recipients who remain eligible.

From a taxpayer perspective, these changes aim to reduce dependency and fiscal drain while encouraging self-sufficiency. Cutting participation and tightening benefit rules will save money and should nudge people who can work into jobs, training, or community service. That reduces long-term program costs and improves the odds that recipients leave the rolls permanently.

For recipients, the new regime is stricter but potentially more constructive. Those who have skills or can learn them are pushed toward employment and are matched with opportunities by state programs. For people without marketplace-ready skills, the requirement creates space for training programs, apprenticeships, and supervised volunteer work that can build resumes and references.

Policy debates will persist about where to draw the line on exemptions and what counts as a meaningful job or training activity, but the direction is clear: make benefits a temporary safety net, not a permanent lifestyle. That approach treats public dollars as investments in recovery and readiness rather than open-ended subsidies.

Practical details still need ironing out at the state level, including how compliance is verified, how training slots scale up, and how to support those with real barriers to employment. States that implement the rules thoughtfully can minimize unintended hardship while maximizing reentry into the workforce. The work requirement is a tool, not a cure-all, and it will require follow-through to turn a policy change into better outcomes.

There is more to do: refining eligibility rules, improving job placement systems, and making sure vulnerable people get targeted help. But these reforms move policy away from perpetuating dependency and toward rewarding effort and progress.