SNAP Reform and Upward Mobility Act of 2025
Sponsored By: Representative Brecheen
In Committee
Summary
Tightening SNAP eligibility and fraud controls would be the bill's central aim. It would also overhaul how the federal government measures poverty and publish new unit-level data and a Commission to value benefits.
Show full summary
- Families and households: Would add an eligibility gate requiring at least 6 consecutive months of receiving a means-tested cash or noncash benefit and would cap registered EBT card users at 5, while imposing progressive sanctions for unauthorized card use.
- States and program administration: Would force a ramp-up in State matching funds to participate in SNAP and would let States retain more recaptured funds, raising the retention share from 35% to 50%. It would also require the Department of Agriculture to report employment and training outcomes and create GAO and Commission reporting tied to measurement changes.
- Retailers and enforcement: Would require annual reauthorization for medium- or high-risk stores, allow permanent disqualification for trafficking, and authorize civil penalties up to $10,000 per violation and up to $40,000 per investigation.
Your PRIA Score
Personalized for You
How does this bill affect your finances?
Sign up for a PRIA Policy Scan to see your personalized alignment score for this bill and every other piece of legislation we track. We analyze your financial profile against policy provisions to show you exactly what matters to your wallet.
Bill Overview
Analyzed Economic Effects
4 provisions identified: 0 benefits, 2 costs, 2 mixed.
Stricter SNAP rules for households
This bill would add a new gate to qualify for SNAP. Your household would need to have received a means-tested benefit for 6 straight months worth at least $50. States could also apply their own income and resource tests within federal rules. Work rules would get tougher: some hour limits would rise (for example, 55 to 64 and 60 to 65), in-person supervised job search would count, and waivers would be set by county using federal job data; married couples with a child over 6 would not face more combined hours than a single parent. Each EBT card would need at least one member and one authorized representative registered, with no more than five total users; unregistered use would trigger sanctions: after 2 uses a rights review, after 4 a 1-month suspension, after 6 a 3-month suspension, and after 7+ one month per use. You would also need to cooperate with any fraud investigation, including meetings and hearings. SNAP purchases would be limited to items the Agriculture Secretary calls essential.
New poverty and benefit data system
Starting in FY2025, the Census would collect extra data on benefits, income, and taxes and publish an alternative poverty measure from 2027; OMB could not use it to set the official poverty line. Agencies would have to provide requested data within 6 months, and states would send annual recipient lists and amounts starting the first full calendar year after enactment. A new 8-member commission would advise how to value benefits and report within 270 days; about $1 million would be authorized. Wrongful access or disclosure of this data would be a felony, with fines up to $300,000 and up to 5 years in prison. GAO would compare measures by January 1, 2028, and every two years, and the bill says Title I would not change who is eligible for benefits.
States would pay more for SNAP
States would have to match federal SNAP administrative funds. The match would be 10% in FY2025, rising each year to 50% in FY2033 and after. The required payment equals the federal admin funds times that year’s percent. States could keep 50% of recovered SNAP overpayments (up from 35%), and any share above 35% would have to fund SNAP fraud investigations. If enacted, this could change how states fund and police the program.
Tighter SNAP rules for stores
Stores the USDA flags as medium or high fraud risk would need yearly approval to keep taking SNAP. States would have to permanently bar stores convicted of trafficking food instruments or exchanging them for firearms, ammo, explosives, or controlled substances. Disqualified stores would not get paid for lost sales. In limited hardship or no-owner-involvement cases, a state could allow continued participation but must charge civil penalties up to $10,000 per violation (max $40,000 per investigation) and report these cases each year.
Free Policy Watch
You just read the policy. Now see what it costs you.
Pick a topic. PRIA runs your household against live legislation and sends you a free personalized readout.
Pick a topic to get started
Sponsors & CoSponsors
Sponsor
Brecheen
OK • R
Cosponsors
Rep. Kennedy, Mike [R-UT-3]
UT • R
Sponsored 3/27/2025
Rep. Grothman, Glenn [R-WI-6]
WI • R
Sponsored 3/27/2025
Roll Call Votes
No roll call votes available for this bill.
View on Congress.govTake It Personal
Get Your Personalized Policy View
Take the PRIA Score to see how policy affects your household, then upgrade to PRIA Full Coverage for year-round monitoring.
Already have an account? Sign in