Research shows that SNAP work requirements do not lead to more jobs, but instead lead to declining labor force participation

As states adopt stricter work requirements for the federal food stamp program, a recent analysis suggests those requirements will not improve employment and will keep more people from receiving food assistance.

The researchers conducted a review of studies on work requirements and concluded that “the best evidence shows that they do not increase employment. Additionally, this research concludes that work requirements lead to large declines in SNAP participation.”

The Research by The Hamilton Project, an economic policy initiative of the left-leaning Brookings Institution, comes at a time of great upheaval for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). Participation is already declining as states implement changes mandated by the president’s major tax and domestic policy bill last summer.

Since the fall, states and counties that administer SNAP have notified residents who rely on food stamps that they must do so Meet work requirements or lose their food aid. These changes included, among other things, exemptions from work requirements for older adults, homeless people, veterans and some rural residents.

Known as the “One Big Beautiful Bill Act,” the law mandated cuts to social service programs, including Medicaid and food stamps.

As SNAP enrollment declines nationwide, more people are likely to lose food assistance as states continue to implement work requirements and recertify participants, said Lauren Bauer, an economic studies fellow at the Brookings Institution and deputy director of the Hamilton Project.

“All we know about work requirements is that they do not increase employment in the groups subject to them,” she told Stateline. “All they do is increase the likelihood that they will disenroll from the program. So if these work requirements continue to be implemented and implemented, we would expect declining enrollment and no changes in employment.”

Bauer said the growing body of research on SNAP has changed her mind about its ability to influence employment. While food stamps reach millions of people each year, the program’s work requirements have proven ineffective, confusing and burdensome, she said.

“I now believe that SNAP should be an anti-hunger program, and there are many, many opportunities for workforce development, career ladders, job training, job searches – all of those things. This is not an anti-hunger program and it should not be associated with it.”

Even more worrisome to them is how the stricter work requirements will affect people who lose their jobs in an economic downturn. SNAP has traditionally been one of the most effective social support measures for the unemployed, helping people who have lost their jobs quickly receive food assistance. But laid-off workers are increasingly being told they can’t get benefits without work.

“It’s just this discordant, unhelpful interaction that you have with the government,” Bauer said. “I lost my job, I need food subsidies. Well, you can only get food subsidies if you have a job.”

At least 2.5 million low-income people, or 6% of those enrolled, have lost SNAP benefits since the law took effect, according to a study by the left-leaning Center on Budget and Policy Priorities Published Wednesday.

Bauer said it is unclear to what extent this decline is directly related to federal legislation. That’s because SNAP participation generally declines during times of economic prosperity and increases during downturns.

But the program faces unprecedented changes: Under the recent law, states have also lost funding for nutrition education programs, must eliminate eligibility for noncitizens such as refugees and asylum seekers, and will lose work exemptions for those who live in areas with narrow employment opportunities. States are also forced to cover a larger share of the program’s costs.

Earlier this week, a USDA spokesperson welcomed the decline in SNAP participation, noting that the number of program participants fell below 40 million for the first time since the pandemic. The speaker said the state newsroom The program would continue to “serve those who need it most while strengthening the integrity of the program.”

Republicans, including U.S. House Speaker Mike Johnson of Louisiana, have defended the SNAP changes, arguing they would lend a hand eliminate waste and fraud in the program.

In a June press release, He called SNAP a “bloated, inefficient program” but said Americans who needed food assistance would still receive it.

“Republicans are proud to defend common-sense social reform, fiscal sanity and the dignity of work,” Johnson said in the press release.

Stateline reporter Kevin Hardy can be reached at khardy@stateline.org.