SNAP Skimming Victims Guaranteed 100% Replacement of Stolen EBT Funds Under New Bill

The “Fairness for Victims of SNAP Skimming Act of 2025” is short, direct, and tackles a major headache for low-income families: EBT fraud. This legislation mandates a crucial change in how states handle stolen Electronic Benefit Transfer (EBT) benefits. If your SNAP (food stamp) benefits are stolen, the state must now replace the exact amount that was taken, ensuring a dollar-for-dollar match for the loss (Sec. 2).

The Skimming Problem and the Fix

For the uninitiated, EBT benefits are loaded onto debit-like cards, and thieves use skimming devices at checkout lanes or ATMs to steal the card information and PINs. This fraud has exploded recently, leaving families reliant on these funds suddenly unable to buy groceries. Before this Act, the rules around replacing stolen benefits were often complicated, sometimes involving caps or complex calculations that didn't always make the victim whole. This bill cuts through that bureaucracy by striking out previous language and requiring a simple 1:1 replacement. If $300 was stolen, $300 is replaced, period (Sec. 2).

What This Means for Your Grocery Budget

Think about a single parent who has $450 in SNAP benefits to feed their kids for the month. If a skimmer hits their card and drains $200, that’s a massive hit—it’s the difference between making it to the next pay cycle or going hungry. This Act ensures that the $200 is fully restored, preventing that family from having to choose between paying rent and buying food. It’s a necessary protection for the most vulnerable users of the SNAP program, ensuring the safety net doesn't have holes poked in it by criminals.

The Trade-Off for State Agencies

While this is a clear win for families, it’s worth noting the practical impact on state government agencies. They are the ones responsible for administering the benefit replacement. Mandating 100% replacement means state budgets will likely absorb higher costs related to fraud reimbursement. For a state, this translates to an increased administrative burden and potentially higher financial liabilities, though the bill doesn't specify where the funding for this increased replacement will come from. However, the intent is clear: the cost of crime should not fall on the shoulders of the low-income people the program is designed to help.