WASHINGTON — A growing number of states are pursuing waivers to impose their own restrictions on what can be purchased with Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits, raising alarms among food retailers and advocates of federal nutrition policy.
In a post on FMI—The Food Industry Association's Voice of the Food Industry Blog today, Elizabeth Tansing, Vice President of State Government Relations at FMI, and Peter Matz, Director of Food, Pharmacy, and health Policy, cautioned that a “patchwork of state-by-state SNAP rules” could undermine the program’s effectiveness, drive up retailer costs, and confuse shoppers.
The shift stems from the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) unprecedented decision to approve a Nebraska waiver request allowing state-specific limits on eligible SNAP products. Iowa and Indiana have since received similar approvals, with additional requests pending from Arkansas, Colorado, Idaho, Kansas, Texas, Utah, and West Virginia.
While states say the changes aim to encourage healthier eating, FMI argues that the unintended consequences far outweigh potential benefits. A decentralized system would create logistical headaches for retailers operating in multiple states, forcing expensive updates to point-of-sale systems every time rules change, or new products hit shelves.
"State-specific restrictions also pose major logistical and financial challenges for food retailers, especially those operating in multiple states. With more than 650,000 food and beverage products on the market today and approximately 20,000 new products introduced into the marketplace each year, and the average grocery store stocking 32,000 items, compliance will be costly and challenging," said Tansing and Matz.
"Layering on state-level SNAP rules would overburden stores, slow checkout lines, and risk noncompliance penalties that could jeopardize a grocer’s participation in SNAP."
The move could also erode shopper trust, especially if cardholders are penalized for unknowingly purchasing restricted items in different states. FMI cited survey data showing that 57% of voters favor a single national standard over a fragmented approach.
Moreover, FMI questions the evidence base for these restrictions. Research shows that SNAP households shop similarly to non-SNAP households, often with higher rates of fresh food purchases. SNAP participation has also been linked to improved health outcomes and reduced medical costs.
Rather than limiting access, FMI is urging policymakers to expand incentive-based solutions like Double Up Food Bucks and SNAP-Ed, which promote healthier food choices without compromising access or efficiency.
“If nothing else, policymakers should keep this in mind: this is not an approach that voters want. Americans prefer a single set of national rules for SNAP,” the post said.
FMI said it will continue working with USDA Secretary Xochitl Torres Small and state governments to protect the integrity and effectiveness of the SNAP program.
