On Oct. 1, the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, most often known as SNAP, will experience significant changes both in its structure and available benefits for eligible persons.
States will now have the responsibility of contributing 75% of the administrative costs required to maintain the program. Additionally, cost-of-living adjustments have been raised, making more people eligible in the midst of the major shift.
The changes and their implications
Three-quarters of the administrative costs behind SNAP will now be covered by the state, with the last quarter covered federally. These cover “personnel costs, application processing and certification, and fraud prevention,” according to North Texas Food Bank.
This is a massive shift from the previously established 50-50 cost share between the state and federal government, forcing Texas to pay an extra $117 million to maintain SNAP than before, as estimated by the Texas Human and Health Services.
The shift will not have any immediate implications on food pantry and SNAP recipients, as “Texas is already going to pay” the administrative costs, according to Government Relations Officer of NTFB Clarissa Clarke. However, later on, “the state’s gonna have to come up with the funding which we’ve already been talking to them about, and they may look to cut other places.”
The state’s gonna have to come up with the funding, which we’ve already been talking to them about and they may look to cut other places.
— Clarissa Clarke, Government Relations Officer of NTFB
On the other hand, SNAP benefits, as well as the income eligibility requirements for them are rising slightly for this next fiscal year, which spans from Oct. 1, 2026 to Sept. 30, 2027. These cost-of-living adjustments rise and fall according to the Thrifty Food Plan, a method of calculating the costs of purchasing “nutritious, low-cost meals for a household” that annually fluctuates according to inflation.
According to sociology professor Andrew McNeely, while the adjustments being made are in the right direction, they’re not enough to adequately address food insecurity.
“The adjustment is, of course, needed,” McNeely said. “It always has to increase with inflation and cost of living, but it’s definitely not at the pace it needs to be and doesn’t reflect current circumstances. So this will probably make even those who still retain eligibility for SNAP and are still able to make use of their benefits, it will stretch those dollars even thinner.”
According to him, food pantries may start to experience more demand starting October as a result.
“We will see more eligible people for SNAP who are using benefits in this moment start using food pantries too,” says McNeely. “They [SNAP benefits] are not going as far, so they’ll need to be able to supplement their household food in some way.”
Students who depend on SNAP benefits but feel as though they’re not enough can find local food pantries to visit using the North Texas Food Bank’s or Tarrant Area Food Bank’s pantry search tool. Before visiting, it is recommended to call the location to confirm open hours and important details.
Food insecurity experts differ on what these changes could mean on a larger level.
Certain policy analysts fear that these major shifts will influence legislatures to cancel SNAP entirely due to the larger financial responsibility they’ll have to endure starting this October, something that will only increase in the upcoming years due to the One Big Beautiful Bill.
Others, like McNeely, believe that outright cancellation is unrealistic, but reductions to SNAP are a very real possibility as reductions are a “modus operandi for the Texas Legislature.”
Why are these changes happening?
While cost of living adjustments occur annually, structural changes usually do not.
The cost shift is a result of the megabill H.R.1, widely known as the “One Big Beautiful Bill Act” passed in July 2025. Many politicians voted on it believing SNAP funding was excessive. The White House published a “Myth vs. Fact”-style press release which labelled the idea of slashed SNAP funding causing many families to hungry as a myth, further adding that the program’s “fraud rate is high,” “it’s become so bloated that it is leaving fewer resources for those who truly need help” and that “the mission of the program has failed.”
According to McNeely, these are misconceptions of SNAP.
“The narrative around those is that it contributes to fraud or waste or inefficiency, but in reality, those error rates come from bureaucratic, not inefficiencies, but just shortfalls in the bureaucratic apparatus which come from previous funding cuts,” McNeely said.
North Texas Food Bank, amongst other agencies dedicated to fight food insecurity, are actively talking to legislators to communicate the importance of funding SNAP in the face of the current changes, but more importantly, changes that are coming up the horizon.
“I’ve been meeting with our state legislators because the legislative session will start in January,” Clarke said. “I just want them to know ahead of time [because] while they’re aware of the law, they weren’t aware really of the amount … the state was gonna need to come up with, so we want to make sure that that is funded.”
The Retrograde will provide updates on SNAP changes as they emerge.