USDA demands states verify SNAP eligibility to prevent fraud
- The USDA has mandated that states enhance their verification processes to prevent undocumented immigrants from receiving SNAP benefits.
- The directive stems from a February executive order by President Trump aiming to increase scrutiny in the assistance programs.
- The goal of these changes is to improve accountability and efficiency in taxpayer expenditures related to food assistance.
In the United States, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) has demanded that state agencies enforce stricter verification processes for the SNAP benefits program to combat fraud and ensure that undocumented immigrants do not receive assistance. This directive follows an executive order signed by President Donald Trump, issued in February, which aims to enhance verification systems and exclude ineligible immigrants from taxpayer-funded support. The USDA's announcement came on Thursday, April 24, 2025, revealing a focus on requiring more reliable documents for identity verification, greater scrutiny of Social Security numbers, and improved usage of the Department of Homeland Security’s Systemic Alien Verification for Entitlements (SAVE) system. Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins emphasized that the goal is to improve the efficiency of taxpayer resources and to safeguard against improper payments, which amounted to 12% of SNAP payments in the previous fiscal year. The local enforcement of these guidelines is still under examination, and the exact timeline for compliance remains uncertain, but the USDA hopes this initiative will significantly cut down on fraudulent claims and ensure that benefits are being allocated correctly. Several states have had discussions about their specific reforms, reflecting an overall trend toward increased scrutiny of assistance programs and their eligibility requirements, particularly as they relate to immigration status. These changes occur simultaneously as debates continue over healthcare and assistance programs in states like California, with criticism targeting perceived misuses and the financial viability of these initiatives.