Published March 4, 2026
The U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) Food and Nutrition Service (FNS) released a proposed rule on September 25, 2025, to update staple food-stocking standards for retailers participating in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). Today, USDA announced the final rule was forthcoming. While improving access to nutritious food is an important goal, the proposed rule raises serious concerns about weakening food access for SNAP participants.
Policy Background: The 2014 Farm Bill and Regulatory Efforts
Congress first addressed SNAP retailer stocking requirements in the 2014 Farm Bill, amending the Food and Nutrition Act of 2008 to require certain retailers to increase the variety of staple foods from three to seven and include perishable items in three categories, improving nutritious options for SNAP participants, especially at small stores. USDA implemented these changes in the 2016 final rule, defining “variety” for staple food categories. However, Congress intervened shortly after, prohibiting USDA from enforcing key parts of the rule until it revised the “variety” definition to allow more foods. In 2019, USDA proposed a new rule addressing flexibility, but nearly 9,000 comments expressed concerns that the provisions were confusing and could reduce access to food, particularly for small retailers.
The Current Proposed Rule
The proposal aims to clarify staple and accessory foods, like snacks or desserts not counted in stocking requirements. It codifies previous guidance, including the SNAP Accessory Foods List. While not altering the 2016 framework, it introduces a new structure for staple food categories and adds definitions for retailer eligibility.
In the proposed rule, retailer standards in SNAP must balance multiple objectives:
- promoting nutrition,
- preventing fraud and abuse, and
- ensuring that low-income households have reliable access to food.
However, achieving these goals outlined in the rule would require recognizing the real constraints faced by SNAP households, including limited transportation, time pressures, constrained budgets, and uneven access to grocery retailers. Food-purchasing decisions are shaped not only by the availability of healthy options but also by price, convenience, quality, personal preferences, and store accessibility.
FRAC advocates for policies that improve access to nutritious, affordable, and culturally suitable foods for SNAP participants. The organization has historically supported the 2014 Farm Bill’s aim of boosting the availability of staple foods in SNAP-approved stores, especially smaller retail outlets. Certain aspects of the current proposal may threaten this goal. Lacking adequate flexibility and careful implementation, the proposed rule could unintentionally decrease the number of SNAP retailers, thereby, restricting food access for low-income communities’ households. Key concerns include:
- potential loss of SNAP-authorized retailers
- narrow and impractical definitions of “variety”
- lack of a clear implementation and technical assistance strategy
- a broader policy environment that undermines the rule’s nutrition goals
Risk of Reduced Food Access
The proposed rule could push some retailers out of SNAP participation, exacerbating food access challenges for SNAP households. This risk is particularly significant for small retailers, which represent the majority of SNAP-authorized stores. According to USDA data, approximately 71 percent of SNAP-authorized retailers are small stores, including convenience stores, small grocery stores, and combination stores.
These retailers are vital for food access, especially where full-service grocery stores are scarce or transportation is limited. Convenience stores are particularly crucial within the SNAP network because of their large number and close proximity to communities. Over 118,000 convenience stores participate in SNAP, making up about 45 percent of all SNAP retailers and representing the largest store format. Their accessibility and long hours make them essential for low-income households.
Unlike many grocery stores, convenience stores often operate 24/7, which is vital for households with nonstandard work hours. About 16 percent of full-time workers have schedules outside the traditional 9-to-5, limiting shopping times; extended hours give working families the flexibility to shop late or early. They also serve areas where other food retailers are rare: A survey by the National Association of Convenience Stores found 43 percent of these stores in rural areas and 36 percent in urban ones. In rural regions, there might be no other food store within 10 miles, and in cities, none within a mile, making transportation a barrier for households.
These retailers are essential in communities lacking transportation or nearby grocery stores, often located in food deserts. The USDA’s Regulatory Impact Analysis (RIA) predicts about 5,000 retailers could lose SNAP authorization under new rules, up from roughly 2,000 now. However, it claims that this will not harm SNAP participant access, though it provides little detail on how this conclusion was reached. It’s unclear how USDA estimated the number of impacted retailers, how many are small businesses, why it assumes all will reapply, or how temporary losses might impact food access. Even a brief loss of authorization can disrupt access for households relying on particular stores and lead to stressful moments at checkout if benefits are declined.
Narrow Definitions of ‛Variety’
The proposed rule’s narrow definition of staple food variety may make compliance difficult for many retailers. USDA’s analysis and external research show these requirements could be challenging for smaller stores. For example, some variations, such as sliced bread, tortillas, and bagels, might be counted as only one variety, which doesn’t reflect consumer-buying habits or retail realities. To keep retailer participation and promote nutritious choices, USDA should allow more flexibility, such as:
- Multiple bread varieties (whole-wheat, corn tortillas)
- Multiple cereal types (oat and corn-based)
- Full-fat and reduced-fat dairy as separate varieties.
These changes would better align with consumer patterns and with USDA’s 2019 proposal.
Implementation and Technical Assistance Challenges
The proposed rule lacks a clear implementation plan and retailer support. Retailers, especially small stores, need time to evaluate inventories, adjust sourcing, and update operations. Research shows small retailers struggle to expand food offerings even under less demanding standards. Successful implementation requires sufficient transition time, clear guidance, retailer education, and technical assistance. The rule does not detail USDA’s support during this transition. Additionally, classifications like shifting high-protein vegetables to the protein category or limiting plant-based dairy may confuse retailers trying to comply.
This Proposed Rule Is Not the Right Action in This Challenging Policy Environment
Evaluating SNAP policies requires considering the broader nutrition policy landscape. Recent federal actions in the budget reconciliation law, H.R. 1, reduced SNAP benefits, capped future increases, shifted costs to states, and ended SNAP-Ed funding — weakening SNAP’s ability to combat food insecurity. These changes cut purchasing power and lessen the program’s impact. Meanwhile, USDA’s termination of the CPS-FSS omits key data needed for policymakers to assess food hardship, undermining efforts to monitor and improve food security, health, and economic stability.
While improving SNAP’s nutritional quality is vital, policies must avoid reducing access, especially for small retailers in underserved areas. Rules that hamper participation and without support risk losing stores and creating barriers for households with low income. USDA should revise the proposed standards to strengthen access to nutrition, set realistic timelines, and include stakeholder input. Amid rising food insecurity and policy setbacks, maintaining and expanding nutrition access should remain priority.