Published April 16, 2025
Recent efforts by some policymakers are seeking to attack the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) payment error threshold provision, which has proven to be a pivotal quality control policy and has been validated by bipartisan support and administrations.
What is the SNAP payment error tolerance threshold?
The SNAP payment error tolerance threshold is the dollar amount used to determine whether a benefit discrepancy is counted in the SNAP payment error rate (PER). Established in a statute to distinguish material payment errors from trivial discrepancies, the threshold provides a standardized measurement rule for the quality control (QC) system. For a full explainer on PER and QC, read here.
Why does the threshold matter for SNAP oversight?
The threshold plays a critical role in ensuring that SNAP QC focuses on errors that truly matter. By excluding very small discrepancies from PER calculations, the threshold prevents insignificant dollar variations from inflating error rates and distorting assessments of program performance.
What is the threshold today?
The current tolerance threshold is set at $58. It has been periodically adjusted by Congress and the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), most notably during the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA) and in subsequent years. Since 2014, USDA has adjusted the threshold annually to reflect changes in the Thrifty Food Plan.
How does the threshold help states focus on quality control?
The threshold enables states to target QC resources toward substantive eligibility and benefit accuracy issues, rather than expending significant staff time documenting and resolving negligible dollar differences. Very small discrepancies often require extensive verification but yield no meaningful program improvement. Excluding these errors allows eligibility workers and QC staff to prioritize:
- correct benefit determinations
- timely and accurate case processing
- service quality and client outcomes
In short, the threshold improves administrative efficiency while maintaining program integrity.
How does the threshold affect the payment error rate (PER)?
By excluding immaterial discrepancies, the threshold reduces the measured PER and improves its usefulness as a performance indicator. This is not an artificial suppression of errors; rather, it ensures that the PER reflects economically and operationally meaningful inaccuracies rather than statistical noise.
What evidence shows that the threshold lowers PER?
Experience under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 demonstrates the threshold’s effect: ARRA temporarily raised the tolerance threshold from $25 to $50 for part of fiscal year (FY) 2009. During that period, exclusions of small errors between $25 and $50:
- reduced the combined SNAP PER by an estimated 15 percent; and
- contributed to a decline in PER from 5.01 percent in FY 2008 to 4.36 percent in FY 2009.
This demonstrates that excluding immaterial errors materially improves the accuracy and interpretability of reported error rates.
Why was the American Recovery Act increase made permanent?
The increase in the threshold demonstrated that raising the threshold significantly reduced SNAP improper payment rates. As a top priority for USDA and Office of Management and Budget (OMB), the agencies agreed that, to improve administrative efficiency, agencies should focus on areas with the greatest potential to improve payment accuracy and reduce improper payments. The update advanced this goal by targeting errors that are most cost-effective to correct and by improving federal data for deeper analysis of error root causes, allowing USDA’s payment accuracy team to better focus on the largest and most consequential errors and to work with states on additional cost-effective strategies to meet the goal of reducing improper payments.
Does excluding small errors weaken program accountability?
No. States are still required to correct all errors identified in QC reviews, regardless of size. The threshold affects only whether a discrepancy is counted in the national PER calculation. It does not eliminate corrective action or oversight responsibilities.
How does reporting work under the threshold?
Errors that are less than or equal to the threshold are excluded from payment error rate calculations, unless the household is found to be ineligible for benefits in the sample month. All errors, regardless of amount, must still be reported to the USDA Food and Nutrition Service and to the appropriate state units responsible for supplemental issuances or claims, consistent with existing policy. This approach maintains transparency while preserving the integrity of error rate measurement.
What would happen if the threshold were eliminated or weakened?
Eliminating or reducing the threshold would increase quality control workload, strain state administrative systems, and distort performance measures, without improving benefit accuracy or household outcomes. States would be forced to spend limited resources resolving minor discrepancies instead of addressing the largest and most serious errors.
These impacts are especially significant given the FY 2025 budget reconciliation law (H.R. 1/OBBBA), which cuts SNAP by $187 billion and increases state costs. Beginning in FY 2027, states must now pay a larger share of SNAP administrative expenses, up from 50 percent to 75 percent, and for the first time in history, states must also cover a portion of benefit costs tied to their payment error rates. Eliminating the threshold would raise error rates on paper, increase administrative burden, and weaken quality control, not because accuracy declined, but because trivial errors would be counted.
As a result, more households could lose benefits, and some states may struggle to sustain SNAP operations. At a time when many states face budget constraints and economic uncertainty, removing the threshold would deepen the effects of federal disinvestment and undermine program stability.