Closing the Meal Gap Act of 2025
- Sponsor
- Rep. Adams, Alma S. [D-NC-12]
- Committees
- Agriculture Committee (primary)
- Last action
- Dec 5, 2025
Bottom line
The Closing the Meal Gap Act of 2025 seeks to increase SNAP benefits and expand eligibility by updating the food plan used for calculations, removing time limits, and adjusting deductions for vulnerable populations.
What it actually does
This bill significantly reforms the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) by changing the basis for calculating benefits from the 'thrifty food plan' to the more generous 'low-cost food plan'. It also eliminates the time limit for able-bodied adults without dependents (ABAWDs) and modifies deductions for medical and shelter expenses, aiming to increase benefit adequacy and access.
Proponents argue
Proponents argue that the bill is essential to address widespread food insecurity by ensuring SNAP benefits accurately reflect the actual cost of a nutritious diet. They contend that updating the food plan, removing punitive time limits, and improving deductions will provide crucial support to millions of low-income Americans, simplifying access and reducing administrative burdens on states.
Opponents contend
Opponents typically raise concerns about the substantial increase in federal spending that would result from expanded SNAP benefits and eligibility. They may argue that removing work requirements could disincentivize self-sufficiency and that the program's overall cost could become fiscally unsustainable, potentially leading to higher taxes or increased national debt.
The bill is relatively concise and clearly structured, allowing an informed reader to quickly grasp its core policy changes and implications.
Section 2(a), (b)
Redefining SNAP Benefit Calculation Basis
This provision amends the Food and Nutrition Act of 2008 to replace the 'thrifty food plan' with the 'low-cost food plan' as the standard for calculating SNAP benefits. It defines the 'low-cost food plan' based on a 4-person family diet and mandates its reevaluation every five years. Additionally, it increases the maximum percentage for household-size adjustments from 8% to 10%.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue that the 'thrifty food plan' is outdated and insufficient to provide a nutritious diet, and shifting to the 'low-cost food plan' will ensure benefits better reflect actual food costs, thereby reducing food insecurity and improving public health outcomes.
Critics contend
Critics contend that this change will lead to a substantial and unsustainable increase in federal expenditures for SNAP, potentially exacerbating budget deficits without adequately addressing the root causes of poverty.
Tradeoffs
The provision balances the goal of providing more adequate food assistance to low-income families against concerns about the significant increase in federal program costs and its impact on the national budget.
Section 3(a)
Establishing a Standard Medical Expense Deduction
This section amends the Food and Nutrition Act of 2008 to allow elderly or disabled SNAP recipients to choose between a standard medical deduction or a deduction of their actual medical costs. The standard deduction is set at $140 for fiscal year 2023, adjusted annually for inflation, and states have the option to establish a higher standard deduction.
Section 3(b)
Removing the Cap on Excess Shelter Expenses
This provision amends the Food and Nutrition Act of 2008 by eliminating the statutory cap on the amount of excess shelter expenses that can be deducted when calculating SNAP benefits. Previously, there was a limit on how much shelter costs could reduce a household's countable income for benefit determination.
Section 4
Repealing the Time Limit for SNAP Benefits
This section amends the Food and Nutrition Act of 2008 by striking subsection (o) of Section 6, which imposed a 3-month time limit on SNAP benefits for able-bodied adults without dependents (ABAWDs) who are not working or participating in a work program. This change removes the requirement for states to track and enforce these time limits.
This technical amendment updates the quality control system for SNAP, specifically adjusting the maximum error rate for fiscal year 2024. It changes the reference from the 'thrifty food plan' to the 'low-cost food plan' for calculating adjustments and sets the fiscal year 2023 maximum at $50, with 2024 adjusted by the difference between the old and new food plans.
Section 2(c) amending Section 16(c)(1)(A)(ii) of the Food and Nutrition Act of 2008
Why it matters:This is standard legislative practice for ensuring that all related statutory provisions are updated to reflect a major definitional change (from thrifty to low-cost food plan) and to maintain the integrity and functionality of the program's oversight mechanisms.
Case for: Ensures that the financial penalties for state error rates are appropriately scaled to the new, higher benefit levels, preventing states from being unduly penalized or under-penalized, and maintaining accountability for program administration.
Case against: No specific opposition is typically raised against such technical adjustments, as they are necessary to ensure the consistent and fair operation of the program following a substantive change.
Estimated impact: Ensures the financial penalties for state error rates are appropriately scaled to the new benefit levels, preventing states from being unduly penalized or under-penalized, thereby maintaining program integrity.
This amendment corrects a statutory reference within Section 11(d) of the Food and Nutrition Act of 2008, which pertains to the administration of SNAP on Indian reservations. It changes 'Act (25 U.S.C. 450)' to 'and Education Assistance Act (25 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.)', updating the citation for the Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act.
Section 2(d)(2)(B)(iii) amending Section 11(d) of the Food and Nutrition Act of 2008
Why it matters:This is a technical correction to ensure accurate legal referencing, a common practice in large amending bills to maintain consistency and clarity across federal statutes.
Case for: Ensures legal accuracy and clarity for the administration of SNAP in tribal areas, preventing potential legal ambiguities or misinterpretations of the law.
Case against: No specific opposition is expected for a purely technical correction of a statutory citation.
Estimated impact: Minor, ensures correct legal interpretation and application of existing law regarding SNAP administration in tribal areas.
This amendment modifies Section 408(a)(12)(B)(i) of the Social Security Act by striking '(r)' each place it appears. This is a conforming amendment likely necessitated by the renumbering of subsections in the Food and Nutrition Act of 2008, ensuring cross-references between the two acts remain accurate.
Section 2(d)(5) amending Section 408(a)(12)(B)(i) of the Social Security Act
Why it matters:This is a technical correction required to maintain consistency across federal statutes after renumbering subsections in the primary Act being amended. It's a necessary housekeeping item.
Case for: Ensures accurate cross-referencing between the Food and Nutrition Act and the Social Security Act, preventing legal confusion and ensuring proper coordination of benefits and eligibility rules between SNAP and other federal programs.
Case against: No specific opposition is expected for such a technical, non-substantive change.
Estimated impact: Ensures proper coordination of benefits and eligibility rules between SNAP and other federal programs by correcting a cross-reference.