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.
What are the most common types of SNAP benefit fraud?
Executive Summary
SNAP benefit misuse centers on three recurring patterns: recipient eligibility fraud and misreporting, retailer trafficking and application fraud, and external scams or organized schemes that steal or monetize Electronic Benefit Transfer (EBT) cards. Measured improper payments spiked into double digits by 2023, with watchdogs estimating roughly 11–12% of benefits improper—about $10–11 billion—while law enforcement actions in 2025 reveal large-scale trafficking rings and insider bribery schemes [1] [2] [3] [4]. Sources agree on core categories but diverge on causes and emphasis: federal reports treat fraud as one component of broader error rates, academic analysts and recent indictments highlight structural vulnerabilities and criminal exploitation, and opinion pieces amplify particular modalities like card-skimming as emblematic problems [5] [6] [2] [7].
1. The Three-Act Playbook: Who Cheats, How, and Why It Matters
Federal oversight frames SNAP integrity around three primary types of misuse: recipient fraud (misstating income or identity), retailer fraud/trafficking (selling benefits for cash or goods), and scams by third parties who steal or monetize EBT value. The USDA’s Food and Nutrition Service lists these categories explicitly, reflecting program rules and enforcement levers, while the Congressional Research Service expands the taxonomy to include state-agency and retailer-application fraud as distinct vectors monitored by metrics like the National Payment Error Rate (NPER) and the National Retailer Trafficking Rate [5] [6]. The emphasis matters because policy responses differ: eligibility audits and client outreach address household errors, while criminal prosecutions and retailer audits target trafficking and systemic abuse.
2. The Numbers: How Big Is the Problem — Fraud or Error?
Watchdog and research estimates converge on a concerning scale of improper payments but diverge on labeling. The Government Accountability Office found an estimated 11.7% improper-payment rate for SNAP in FY2023—about $10.5 billion—a sum that combines both innocent administrative errors and intentional fraud [1]. Independent researchers and policy papers attribute much of the dollar loss to trafficking and misreporting, arguing structural program weaknesses allow monetization of benefits [2]. The CRS stresses that while outright fraud is relatively rare compared with administrative error, the monetary impact of trafficking and retailer schemes is disproportionate, which is why separate measures like retailer trafficking rates are tracked [6].
3. Modern Modalities: From Card Skimming to Organized Crime Rings
Multiple accounts highlight evolving methods: card skimming, phishing, resale of purchased food, and purchasing EBT cards from vulnerable people are recurring themes. Conservative commentary lists ten common abuses—including chipless EBT vulnerabilities that make skimming easier—while law enforcement indictments and local investigations in 2025 document multimillion-dollar schemes involving insiders, bribery, and organized rings buying EBT cards for a fraction of their value and converting them into cash or drugs [7] [3] [4] [8]. These recent criminal cases illustrate how tactical schemes can scale and intersect with other illicit markets, shifting the conversation from individual misuse to networked exploitation.
4. Where Consensus Ends: Disputed Causes and Policy Prescriptions
Analysts agree vulnerabilities exist but disagree on root causes and solutions. The GAO urges stronger USDA oversight and corrective actions, framing the issue as both administrative and criminal [1]. Economists and policy thinkers point to structural incentives—limited verification windows, retail monitoring gaps, and insufficient technology on EBT cards—as drivers that permit trafficking and error, recommending a mix of technological upgrades, tougher retailer screening, and targeted prosecutions [2]. Commentary pieces willing to emphasize fraud prevalence can shape public perceptions and policy priorities differently than federal reports that separate error from intentional abuse; readers should note these different intents and audiences [7] [6].
5. Recent Enforcement: From Indictments to Local Crackdowns — What the Cases Reveal
2025 prosecutions and local police operations show how theory translates into practice: a May indictment alleged a multimillion-dollar bribery and food-stamp fraud scheme involving a USDA employee, and October police actions uncovered networks buying EBT cards on the street and funneling benefits into retail or drug markets—evidence that trafficking schemes remain active and adaptive [3] [4] [8]. These cases confirm that while many improper payments stem from administrative errors, organized exploitation and insider involvement can produce outsized losses and require cross-agency criminal investigations. The pattern supports watchdog calls for both program integrity investments and criminal enforcement tailored to trafficking networks [1] [6].