How do states calculate excess shelter deductions for SNAP recipients with high rent or mortgage costs?
This fact-check may be outdated. Consider refreshing it to get the most current information.
Executive summary
States calculate the SNAP excess shelter deduction by converting a household’s reported shelter costs and standard utility allowance into a single “shelter total,” subtracting 50% of the household’s adjusted net income (income after other allowable deductions), and allowing as a deduction whatever remains up to a federally set cap for non‑elderly/non‑disabled households; households with an elderly or disabled member are generally exempt from the cap and may deduct all shelter costs above 50% of net income [1] [2]. States implement that federal framework with specific verification rules, utility allowance amounts, and cap figures that can vary slightly by state and system [3] [4].
1. What counts as “shelter” and how states total it
Shelter costs that feed into the excess shelter calculation typically include rent or mortgage payments (principal and interest), condo or association fees, property taxes and insurance related to the structure, and continuing charges tied to home ownership such as mobile‑home lot rent; utilities used for heating/cooling are handled through a Standard Utility Allowance (SUA) which is added to non‑utility shelter costs to produce the household’s total shelter expense [5] [2] [1]. States note that some items are excluded—renters insurance is generally not allowable—and third‑party/vendor payments directly to landlords may be treated differently for deduction purposes [6] [7].
2. The math: turning gross income and shelter into an “excess” deduction
Calculation follows a simple sequence: determine preliminary net income by subtracting permitted deductions (earned income deduction, standard deduction, dependent care, allowable medical costs, etc.) from gross monthly income; add the household’s non‑utility shelter costs to the SUA to get total shelter expenses; subtract half of the household’s adjusted net income from that shelter total; if the result is positive, it is the excess shelter amount eligible as a deduction—subject to the cap rules discussed below [2] [8].
3. Caps, exceptions, and state application
Federal policy imposes a maximum excess shelter deduction for most households (examples in the reporting show caps like $744, $712, $597, or $712/$744 depending on state materials and dates), and states’ manuals list the operational cap the state uses when running SNAP budgets in their eligibility systems [3] [9] [4] [10]. The crucial federal exception is for households containing an elderly (60+) or disabled member: they can deduct all excess shelter costs over 50% of net income without the cap applied [1] [2].
4. Verification, proration, and special situations
States require verification of shelter expenses in many contexts—applications, recertifications, and changes—with some jurisdictions implementing third‑party verification requirements (effective dates vary by state) and guidance on how to prorate shared housing costs so only the SNAP household’s portion counts [3] [7] [11]. Policies also address unusual cases—vacant homes held while a household intends to return, split payments between households, or HUD/subsidy payments that reduce the household’s reported rent—each with rules that can affect the allowed deduction [5] [12] [10].
5. Policy debate and implicit agendas
Advocacy groups argue the cap undermines SNAP’s ability to address high housing costs and push for uncapping the deduction so households can deduct full excess shelter costs; organizations like FRAC and others frame the cap as arbitrary and harmful to families with high rents [13] [14]. State administrations and fiscal offices often emphasize caps and verification to limit program costs and prevent fraud, creating a tension between benefit adequacy and budget control that shapes how strictly states apply verification, utility allowances, and caps [3] [4]. Where reporting uses different cap figures, those differences usually reflect state‑level policy or dated guidance rather than a change to the federal method itself [9] [10].