H.R.1398 - Securing Strictly Needy Americans’ Pivotal (SNAP) Benefits Act of 2025 (119th Congress)
Summary
H.R.1398, the "Securing Strictly Needy Americans’ Pivotal (SNAP) Benefits Act of 2025," proposes amendments to the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2023, and the Food and Nutrition Act of 2008. The bill aims to restrict the use of EBT cards for out-of-state purchases and limit SNAP benefit redemption by owners of approved retail food stores or wholesale food concerns.
The bill mandates the suspension of EBT accounts with exclusively out-of-state transactions exceeding 60 days, pending proof of in-state residency or investigation. It also prohibits SNAP recipients who own retail food stores or wholesale food concerns from redeeming benefits at their own establishments, with exceptions for publicly owned corporations or government-owned entities.
The act is set to take effect one year after enactment.
Expected Effects
The bill will likely result in stricter enforcement of SNAP benefit usage, potentially reducing fraud and misuse. It could also create administrative burdens for state agencies and beneficiaries.
Retail food store owners who are also SNAP recipients would be restricted from using their benefits at their own stores. This could affect small business owners who rely on SNAP benefits.
Potential Benefits
- Potentially reduces fraud and misuse of SNAP benefits by restricting out-of-state purchases.
- May ensure that SNAP benefits are used by eligible residents within the state providing the benefits.
- Could prevent conflicts of interest by limiting store owners from redeeming their own SNAP benefits at their stores.
- May improve public perception of the SNAP program by addressing concerns about misuse.
- Could lead to more efficient allocation of SNAP resources.
Most Benefited Areas:
Potential Disadvantages
- Creates additional administrative burdens for state agencies to investigate and verify residency.
- May disproportionately affect low-income individuals who travel out of state for work, medical care, or family reasons.
- Could negatively impact small business owners who rely on SNAP benefits to supplement their income.
- May increase the risk of errors and delays in benefit delivery due to stricter enforcement.
- Could lead to increased stigma and scrutiny for SNAP recipients.
Most Disadvantaged Areas:
Constitutional Alignment
The bill's alignment with the US Constitution is complex. Congress has the power to regulate interstate commerce under Article I, Section 8, which could justify restrictions on out-of-state EBT transactions. However, the bill could potentially raise concerns under the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment if it disproportionately affects certain groups of people.
The restrictions on business owners might also be challenged under the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment if they are deemed arbitrary or unreasonable. The bill does not appear to infringe on any specific enumerated rights, such as those protected by the First or Second Amendments.
Ultimately, the constitutionality of the bill would depend on whether the restrictions are narrowly tailored to achieve a legitimate government interest and whether they are applied in a non-discriminatory manner.
Impact Assessment: Things You Care About ⓘ
This action has been evaluated across 19 key areas that matter to you. Scores range from 1 (highly disadvantageous) to 5 (highly beneficial).