What is EBT card trafficking and how is it carried out?
Executive summary
EBT card trafficking means converting Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits into cash or ineligible goods — typically by retailers or intermediaries who accept EBT payments and return cash or prohibited items instead of food [1]. Criminal schemes range from phony store authorizations and skimming/cloning of cards to point‑of‑sale hacks and brute‑force PIN attacks; federal prosecutions and agency warnings show these are widespread and growing, with authorities documenting multimillion‑dollar cases and a sharp rise in fraudulent SNAP transactions [2] [3] [4].
1. What “EBT trafficking” legally means — the crime in plain terms
EBT trafficking is the deliberate exchange of SNAP benefits for cash or other non‑eligible items, or the use of false retailer credentials and doctored applications so unauthorized businesses can accept benefits; under USDA rules, retailers that “exchange SNAP benefits for cash (i.e., trafficking)” are committing fraud and face penalties [1]. Prosecutors have charged individuals who submitted fraudulent USDA applications, misappropriated license numbers and installed EBT terminals at ineligible businesses like smoke shops to route benefits into illicit cash flows [2].
2. How criminals turn benefits into cash — the operational playbook
Investigations and reporting show multiple operational methods: criminals get illicit access to EBT terminals by faking retailer credentials or doctoring applications to obtain terminals; they install skimming devices on legitimate readers to capture card data; they clone cards and use brute‑force PIN attacks because many EBT cards share state prefixes and simple four‑digit PINs; and groups hack point‑of‑sale systems to process fraudulent transactions tied to stores that may be closed or never authorized [2] [5] [6] [4].
3. Scale and recent trends — rising fraud, large sums seized
Federal and industry data document rapid growth: one report found fraudulent SNAP transactions jumped 55% from late FY2024 to early FY2025 (from 444,553 to 691,604) [3]. Private and law‑enforcement estimates put stolen benefits in the hundreds of millions in 2025 alone — Propel estimated $349 million in the first half of 2025 — and federal sweeps have seized skimming devices and stopped multi‑million‑dollar schemes [4] [7] [2].
4. Typical actors — from small operators to transnational rings
Victims’ accounts and law enforcement describe a spectrum of perpetrators: opportunistic local scammers who target nearby recipients; corrupt retailers or complicit store employees who convert benefits for cash; and increasingly sophisticated transnational crime networks that monetize stolen benefits abroad and exploit systemic vulnerabilities in EBT infrastructure [5] [4].
5. Why EBT systems are vulnerable — technology and design limits
Authorities and reporting point to several structural weaknesses: many EBT systems still rely on magnetic‑stripe technology and four‑digit PINs, making skimming, cloning and brute‑force attacks easier; interstate differences in card numbering and limited state resources slow modern upgrades such as EMV chips; and the cost to move to chip‑enabled EBT can be millions per state, creating political and budgetary friction [1] [4].
6. What agencies and companies are doing — detection, replacement, prosecution
USDA and its partners say they work with state agencies, processors and law enforcement to identify, prevent and punish trafficking, including replacing some stolen benefits under specific authorities and bringing criminal charges in large cases [1] [8] [2]. Secret Service and FBI operations have seized skimmers and disrupted local rings; state policies in places like Pennsylvania now let recipients lock cards via apps to limit misuse [7] [3].
7. Practical risks for recipients and recommended safeguards
State guidance stresses user actions: keep your PIN secret, change it regularly, freeze or lock the card when not in use, inspect unfamiliar card readers for skimmers and report suspicious activity immediately — freezing a card can stop new purchases and ATM transactions [9] [10]. These steps reduce personal exposure but do not eliminate systemic risks documented by investigators [9] [4].
8. Conflicting perspectives and policy tensions
There is a policy tradeoff: advocates and some lawmakers call for EMV chip EBT cards to reduce skimming, while federal and state officials note chip rollouts are expensive ($2M–$11.5M per state estimated) and not an absolute cure [4]. USDA emphasizes enforcement and modernization with partners; critics say investment and faster technology upgrades are needed to keep pace with organized criminal techniques [1] [4].
Limitations: available sources do not mention specific technical details of every skimmer model, nor do they provide exhaustive prosecutions nationwide; this summary draws only on the supplied reporting and official notices [2] [1] [3] [4].