U.S. states and territories collectively made $10 billion in improper payments to SNAP recipients during fiscal year 2025, according to data released by the U.S. Department of Agriculture. The finding represents a significant discrepancy between what Congress intended for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program and what was actually distributed nationwide.
The USDA report shows that the average error payment rate—including both overpayments and underpayments—reached approximately 10.6% for the fiscal year. This figure surpasses the congressionally set tolerance threshold of 6%, which is designed to establish an acceptable margin of error in benefit distribution while accounting for administrative complexity.
What the Right Is Saying
Conservative critics say the $10 billion figure represents a substantial misuse of taxpayer funds that warrants immediate attention. Fiscal responsibility advocates argue that every dollar improperly distributed is a dollar diverted from those who genuinely qualify for assistance or from other government priorities.
Senator John Cornyn of Texas has been vocal about the need to strengthen program integrity in means-tested benefits. The Heritage Foundation, a conservative policy organization, has published analyses arguing that error rates above congressional thresholds demonstrate insufficient oversight mechanisms at both federal and state levels.
Some Republican lawmakers have called for stricter eligibility verification processes and increased penalties for fraud rather than simple administrative errors. Representative James Comer of Kentucky, who chairs the House Oversight Committee, has previously investigated improper payments across federal programs and argued for enhanced data-sharing between agencies to verify applicant information.
What the Left Is Saying
Progressive advocates argue that focusing on improper payment rates overlooks the larger issue of food insecurity affecting millions of Americans. They note that SNAP serves as a critical safety net during economic downturns and that some degree of administrative error is inevitable when processing millions of applications annually.
Democratic lawmakers have emphasized that underpayments represent just as significant a problem as overpayments in the system. Representative Barbara Lee of California has previously argued that benefit programs should err on the side of ensuring people do not go hungry rather than strictly policing eligibility. The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, a left-leaning think tank, has noted that SNAP's error rate remains lower than several other federal benefit programs.
Some advocates contend that investment in administrative modernization and outreach could reduce errors while improving access for eligible families. They point to states that have implemented streamlined enrollment processes as models for reducing both overpayments and underpayments simultaneously.
What the Numbers Show
The USDA fiscal year 2025 data indicates $10 billion in total improper SNAP payments against approximately $94.3 billion in total program spending, representing roughly 10.6% of benefits distributed with errors. The congressionally mandated performance threshold stands at 6%, meaning this year's error rate exceeds the acceptable level by approximately 4.6 percentage points.
Improper payments include both overpayments made to ineligible recipients and underpayments that failed to provide full benefits to qualifying households. State agencies administer SNAP under federal guidelines and bear responsibility for accuracy in their benefit determinations. The USDA provides funding for benefits while states share administrative costs.
According to government accountability data, SNAP has historically struggled with error rates above the 6% threshold. The program serves approximately 42 million people monthly across all U.S. states and territories, making it one of the largest federal social safety net programs by enrollment.
The Bottom Line
The $10 billion in improper payments represents both a financial issue for taxpayers and an administrative challenge for program administrators. Congress set the 6% threshold as an acceptable error rate given SNAP's complexity, but the sustained overage raises questions about whether current verification systems are adequate.
State agencies face pressure to process applications quickly while maintaining accuracy—a balance that often produces elevated error rates in means-tested programs serving large populations. The USDA could potentially increase compliance oversight or require additional verification steps, though such measures carry their own costs and could delay benefits for eligible recipients.
Program defenders note that reducing errors requires resources, and any changes to eligibility verification would need to be carefully designed to avoid denying benefits to people who qualify. Lawmakers on both sides have expressed interest in addressing improper payments while preserving access for those genuinely in need.
The USDA report is expected to inform upcoming congressional discussions about reauthorizing the farm bill, under which SNAP operates. Both chambers will likely examine program integrity measures as part of broader negotiations over food assistance policy.