Eighteen states plan to stop Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program recipients from using benefits to buy soda, candy and desserts this year, according to federal waiver records. The U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Food and Nutrition Service has approved state requests that spell out which products are off limits and when the rules are supposed to start. The shift matters for low income households because it narrows what can be purchased with a benefit that often runs out before the month does.
Why 18 states will block SNAP recipients from matters now
The policy fight is no longer theoretical. The USDA Food and Nutrition Service keeps an online list of approved SNAP Food Restriction Waivers that identifies 18 states, the foods they want to restrict, and targeted start dates in 2026, according to the federal waiver tracker. For families in those states, that means a trip to the grocery store will soon involve more split transactions at the register as some items must be paid for with cash or debit instead of an Electronic Benefit Transfer card.
The stakes are especially immediate in states that pressed for early start dates. A printable February 27, 2026 snapshot of the same waiver table lists each state alongside its implementation date and a short summary of the restricted categories, according to the Food and Nutrition Service PDF. That document shows which states aimed to flip the switch early in the year and which scheduled changes closer to midyear, setting up a natural test of how quickly retailers and shoppers adjust.
The working hypothesis from policy analysts is straightforward: states that pair those early dates with clear instructions for retailers will see faster drops in redemptions for soda, candy and prepared desserts than states that rely mainly on public announcements. Texas provides one example of detailed implementation, with a state specific page that includes the federal approval letter, the original request and later modifications for its SNAP Food Restriction Waiver, according to USDA guidance linked from the agency’s central site. That kind of paperwork gives grocers a rulebook for reprogramming scanners and training cashiers.
The evidence behind 18 states will block SNAP recipients from
The backbone of the claim that 18 states will block certain purchases is the federal government’s own documentation. The USDA Food and Nutrition Service describes these state experiments as SNAP Food Restriction Waivers and lists each approved state in a public table that includes the state name, an implementation date and a short restriction summary, according to the online waiver list. The February 27, 2026 printable version confirms that, as of that date, 18 states had secured approval to limit items such as soda, candy and desserts.
Those high level entries are backed by state specific files. The Texas SNAP Food Restriction Waiver materials, for example, are posted with the approval letter, the original request and modification documents, according to the Texas page cited within USDA’s own blog network. Similar packets exist for other states and spell out how each defines “soda,” “low calorie soda,” “candy” or “prepared dessert,” which matters for items that sit on the border between categories.
At the national level, the administration has framed the waivers as part of a health push. A federal press release from the Food and Nutrition Service states that Secretary Rollins signed SNAP waivers for Arkansas, Idaho, Utah, Indiana, Iowa and Nebraska and ties those approvals to a “Make America Healthy Again” theme, according to the USDA’s newsroom page. In the same document, USDA describes Arkansas as excluding soda, low calorie soda and candy effective July 1, 2026, and Idaho as excluding soda and candy effective January 1, 2026.
The February 27, 2026 printable table adds timing context across all 18 states, according to the Food and Nutrition Service PDF snapshot. Because it freezes the approvals as of late February, it shows that many of the waivers were locked in before summer 2026 implementation dates, giving states several months to prepare retailer notices and consumer outreach.
What remains unresolved for 18 states will block SNAP recipients from
The legal footing for some of these restrictions is unsettled. A federal judge ruled that the government cannot stop SNAP dollars from buying candy and sugary drinks, according to an account of the decision that cites the national scope of the ruling. That ruling sits in direct tension with the Food and Nutrition Service statement that Secretary Rollins signed waivers for Arkansas, Idaho, Utah, Indiana, Iowa and Nebraska that are designed to remove soda and candy from SNAP purchases, according to the USDA press material. The conflict raises basic questions about how long the 18 state experiment can last.
The court fight is documented in Aragon v. Rollins, where docket 72419889/36 contains case filings that challenge the federal approval of SNAP Food Restriction Demonstrations, according to the CourtListener record. Those filings help explain why advocates argue that SNAP law does not let USDA or states carve whole product categories like soda and candy out of eligible foods.
Another gap is data. The Food and Nutrition Service tracker and state waiver packets describe what should happen on paper but do not include purchase statistics that show whether redemptions for soda, candy or desserts have fallen in states with early implementation, according to the federal resource listings. Without that, the hypothesis that clear retailer guidance plus early dates will drive faster changes in buying patterns remains untested in public records.
For households using SNAP, the most practical step is to check state specific guidance before shopping, particularly in places listed on the Food and Nutrition Service waiver table. Grocers are receiving targeted notices, such as the Texas SNAP Food Restriction Waiver retailer notice posted by USDA, according to the agency’s guidance page. Shoppers will feel the change at the register, where items like soda or candy may suddenly be declined on the EBT card even though they were covered in past years, and the next thing to watch is whether courts or new federal guidance narrow or expand how far those 18 state waivers can go.
