Participation in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) has fallen by more than 13% in a single year, according to federal data released in August 2026. The decline—from 42.2 million recipients in May 2025 to 36.6 million in May 2026—exceeds government projections and marks the largest annual drop in program history.
The sharpest reduction occurred in Arizona, where enrollment plummeted by 53% over the same period. Other states with notable declines include Georgia (20%+), Louisiana (20%+), Nevada (20%+), and Florida (20%+). The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), which administers SNAP, attributed the changes to updated eligibility rules and work requirements implemented under the Trump administration’s 2025 domestic policy package.
Who is losing coverage?
Advocacy groups and state officials report that eligible households are losing benefits for multiple reasons. Some individuals fail to meet new work mandates or documentation deadlines, while others are disqualified due to missing paperwork or administrative errors. The USDA has not yet provided a breakdown of how many recipients lost benefits for each reason.
State-level challenges
Officials in Arizona and other high-decline states cite overwhelmed state agencies as a contributing factor. Arizona’s SNAP caseload dropped from 887,000 in May 2025 to approximately 410,000 in May 2026, with state administrators noting difficulties processing recertifications under the new rules.
Program background
SNAP, the largest federal nutrition assistance program, serves more than 35 million low-income Americans monthly, including millions of households with children. The program’s monthly caseload has only dipped below 40 million twice in the past 16 years, most recently in 2019 and 2020. The current decline is the steepest since the program’s expansion during the Great Recession.
Next steps
The USDA has not indicated whether additional adjustments will be made to the eligibility criteria or state administration processes. Advocacy groups are calling for reviews of the recertification procedures, while policymakers supporting the changes argue the reductions reflect improved efficiency and reduced fraud.