WASHINGTON ― A new study suggests that the expanded work requirements for federal food assistance that passed as part of President Donald Trump’s domestic policy bill over the summer will not have their intended effect of boosting employment.

An analysis published this month in the journal Nature Food says that introducing or increasing work requirements in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) has previously led to participants dropping out of the program ― up to 64% increases in participant exits ― “without yielding meaningful improvement in employment outcomes.”

The paper was co-authored by Michigan State University’s Vincenzina Caputo, a professor of consumer and food economics, and David R. Just, professor of applied economics at Cornell University.

“Looking specifically at the people who should be affected or encouraged to work, it didn’t make a big difference,” Just said of work requirements for SNAP, the program previously known as food stamps.

"There was no real difference in people looking for jobs and taking jobs among those groups, you did find a marginal impact on people deciding not to retire until a little later."

Expanded work requirements for taxpayer-funded food assistance were enacted as part of Trump’s One Big Beautiful Bill, which the Republican president signed into law on July 4.

The changes included increasing the work requirements for able-bodied adults without dependents to age 64. These individuals must be working or take part in approved job training programs for at least 20 hours a week in order to receive benefits for more than three months.

The researchers suggested an alternative to work requirements might be automatically enrolling all SNAP participants in existing employment and training programs ― a move that wouldn’t require additional benefit spending or infrastructure changes.

Republican lawmakers, in adopting the work requirements change in the OBBB, said they wanted to encourage personal responsibility and boost employment nationwide, while also forcing states to take on more of SNAP’s administrative costs.

"Hardworking taxpayers should not have to pay the bills of able-bodied, working-aged adults," said Rep. Lisa McClain, a Bruce Township Republican who chairs the House GOP Conference.

"I will continue to fight to make sure those in greatest need have the safety net required to get back on their feet, but it undermines program integrity when there are no guardrails to protect the taxpayers footing the costs."

The expanded work requirements are projected to achieve roughly a third of the $187 billion in savings on SNAP spending over the next 10 years as part of the legislation.

Just and Caputo’s paper urged policymakers to consider the inadequacy of SNAP benefit values, saying that soaring inflation for groceries has severely eroded purchasing power. They recommended moving toward localized price indexing to better respond to fluctuations in local food costs.

"There have only been a couple of big updates in the benefits that were beyond adjustments for changes in the Consumer Price Index," Just said. "But oddly, they pegged the regular changes to the wrong Consumer Price Index. They index it for all consumer goods, instead of food. And food is much more volatile."

Just and Caputo also addressed the waivers that six states got from the U.S. Department of Agriculture earlier this year to pilot restrictions on what products SNAP benefits may be used to purchase, such as sugary drinks or processed foods.

The professors pointed to evidence suggesting these limits only have “modest” effects on consumption unless they’re combined with corresponding incentives or subsidies for more nutritious foods like fruits and vegetables.

“The substitution of dollars for SNAP benefits mutes the intended effect, allowing most SNAP recipients to bypass the restrictions,” the study found.

The researchers suggested that, instead of banning certain foods, SNAP participants could get a 10% bonus when purchasing fruits and vegetables.

Just and Caputo also recommended policymakers reduce “excessive” administrative burdens to expand program reach, such as frequent recertification, document requirements and “unclear” guidelines for eligibility.

Earlier this month, Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins said the Trump administration would force all SNAP beneficiaries to reapply in order to continue receiving benefits as part of an effort to reduce fraud.

The USDA later walked back those remarks, saying it would continue to rely on existing processes used by states to verify participants’ work history, income and other personal information to ensure they’re eligible for benefits, Politico reported.

The federal government shutdown this fall caused the first disruption in SNAP benefits in decades, leading to a legal battle between the administration and states.

©2025 The Detroit News. Visit detroitnews.com. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.