Keep Factually independent
Whether you agree or disagree with our analysis, these conversations matter for democracy. We don't take money from political groups - even a $5 donation helps us keep it that way.
Do states report SNAP use by immigration status and country of origin?
Executive Summary
States do not consistently publish SNAP participation by individuals’ immigration status or country of origin; federal reporting historically aggregates demographic data and recent federal initiatives require states to submit immigration-status-related data to a new SNAP Information Database for eligibility verification, but that database’s public reporting of country-of-origin fields remains unclear. The evidence shows a split between past practice—largely aggregated reporting—and a 2025 federal push to collect detailed personally identifiable immigration data for integrity checks, generating legal, privacy and state-compliance debate [1] [2] [3].
1. Sharp question: Do state SNAP reports show who is an immigrant or where they were born?
Federal and state public SNAP reports historically focus on aggregated demographic and programmatic measures—household income, presence of children, benefit amounts and state caseloads—without routinely publishing participant counts by immigration status or country of origin. Major program summaries and state-by-state analyses reviewed emphasize aggregated participation and demographic breakdowns but do not document public, state-level tables enumerating SNAP recipients by immigration status or country of birth [1] [4]. The Migration Policy Institute and other data profiles have produced model-based state estimates of immigrant household eligibility and participation, which use research methods and administrative files to estimate immigrants’ program access, but these studies are not equivalent to official state-published rosters by immigration status or country of origin [5] [6].
2. Federal change: The SNAP Information Database creates new data flows to states—why that matters
In 2025 USDA published plans for a SNAP Information Database that will collect participant-level data from all 53 SNAP agencies aimed at verifying eligibility, detecting duplicate enrollment, and performing immigration-status checks; this represents a policy shift from aggregated reporting toward centralized collection of personally identifiable information for integrity purposes [2]. The database’s statutory authorities and privacy obligations are cited, and the files are intended to include transactional and participant fields that states must submit. What remains contested is whether the database will produce public reports broken down by immigration status or country of origin; the USDA materials show collection for enforcement and verification but do not clearly commit to publishing country-of-origin tabulations [2].
3. Conflicting signals: research estimates versus administrative reporting practices
Research briefs and data profiles produce state-by-state estimates of immigrant households’ SNAP eligibility and participation, showing that analysts can derive immigrant-focused measures even when states do not publicly publish the same breakdowns [5] [6]. These analyses rely on surveys, modeling, and limited administrative linkages to infer immigrant participation; they demonstrate the feasibility of estimating immigrant participation while underscoring that official program reporting has typically not presented raw counts by immigration status or nativity. Thus, academic and policy researchers supply much of the public-facing granularity about immigrants and SNAP rather than routine state public reports [5].
4. Privacy, legal and political flashpoints around collecting immigration data
The USDA database initiative and federal requests for personally identifiable information have provoked refusals, legal challenges, and advocacy concern over privacy and chilling effects on immigrant families; some states and civil-society actors objected to providing sensitive immigration data to federal systems [3]. Those disputes highlight an important tension: the federal program’s desire for integrity checks that require status verification collides with state concerns about confidentiality, local immigrant trust, and litigation risks. The sources show this debate is active in 2025, with litigation and state noncompliance affecting how comprehensively immigration data will be reported or used publicly [3] [2].
5. What the evidence says about country-of-origin reporting specifically
None of the reviewed official program summaries or research briefs show states routinely publishing SNAP participation by country of origin; while the USDA database is described as capable of performing immigration-status checks, the materials reviewed do not clearly confirm collection or public reporting of country-of-origin fields for recipients. Researchers have produced estimates of immigrant household eligibility using survey and administrative methods, but those outputs are distinct from state-published, person-level country-of-origin counts [7] [2] [6]. The absence of explicit public tables by country of origin in program reports indicates that, as of the latest materials, country-of-origin breakdowns are not standard public outputs.
6. Bottom line and practical implications for data users and policymakers
For policymakers and researchers seeking official counts of SNAP recipients by immigration status or country of origin, the record shows limited public availability: past public reporting is aggregated and researcher-produced estimates fill many gaps, while a 2025 USDA database aims to centralize status-related data for verification—raising privacy and legal issues that affect future reporting practices [1] [2] [3]. Users must rely on a combination of model-based state estimates, targeted research briefs, and evolving federal administrative systems to track immigrant participation; whether the new federal data will be released in disaggregated public form remains unresolved and contingent on legal and policy developments documented in the 2025 sources [5] [3].