2026-06-29T13:21:00-0400 / 哥伦比亚广播公司新闻（CBS News）
撰稿
更新于：2026年6月29日 / 美国东部时间下午2:09 / 哥伦比亚广播公司新闻
在谷歌上关注哥伦比亚广播公司新闻
特朗普政府表示，补充营养援助计划（即人们熟知的食品券项目）因被其定性为欺诈、浪费和滥用的支付失误，每年损失数十亿美元。但反饥饿倡导者称，这一描述具有误导性，可能威胁到数百万低收入家庭的食品援助。
美国农业部6月24日表示，2025财年食品券项目的支付失误率为10.6%，几乎是共和党2025年“宏伟法案”（OBBBA）设定的6%可接受阈值的两倍。该机构称，去年的失误率意味着全美范围内的SNAP违规支付金额超过100亿美元。
2025财年，SNAP向美国家庭提供了957亿美元的福利金，这意味着支付失误约占该项目总支出的十分之一。
欺诈还是失误？
关于食品券欺诈普遍程度的分歧，核心在于SNAP支付失误率的实际衡量标准。无论相关家庭是否故意违反规定，只要其领取的福利金过多或过少，就会出现支付失误，而专家表示这类多付或少付通常并非有意为之。
相比之下，欺诈通常涉及故意欺骗行为，例如将福利金转售换取现金，或使用被盗的电子福利转账（EBT）卡信息。
特朗普政府将支付失误率作为该项目存在浪费的证据。但代表州和地方人类服务机构的美国公共人类服务协会（APHSA）指出，该指标并未涵盖许多最常见的SNAP欺诈形式，例如EBT卡盗刷或受助者非法转售福利金换取现金。
美国政府问责局（GAO）2024年的一份报告发现，SNAP的支付失误往往源于多付或少付问题，并将食品券欺诈描述为一个相关但独立的问题。
美国公共人类服务协会的SNAP质量控制专家布莱恩·琼斯对哥伦比亚广播公司新闻表示，支付失误“大多是无意的，因为相关政策非常复杂，还有许多家庭可能并不了解的申报要求”。
共和党人士认为，减少支付失误和欺诈行为能够节省纳税人资金，并确保福利金仅发放给符合资格的受助者。
“该项目中的每一分钱都旨在帮助有需要的合格个人，”田纳西州共和党众议员蒂姆·伯切特在6月25日众议院小组委员会关于“打击SNAP中的浪费、欺诈和滥用行为”的听证会上表示，“但远非每一分钱都能落到实处。”
反饥饿倡导者表示，虽然关注欺诈行为很重要，但食品券支付失误在很大程度上反映了受助者个人和经济状况的变化，例如找到或失去工作。失误也可能源于文书问题，例如地址或电话号码缺失。
“我们不应将支付失误与欺诈混为一谈，”反饥饿倡导组织食品研究与行动中心（FRAC）的SNAP主管吉娜·普拉塔-尼诺在同一场听证会上表示，“欺诈涉及故意不当行为——而支付失误往往源于复杂的规则、变动的工作时长、缺失的文书、过时的系统或机构失误。”
追回多付款项
根据联邦法律，SNAP受助者必须偿还多付款项，各州通常会通过削减月度福利金的方式追回资金。
“州和县级项目管理人员应努力将失误率降至最低，因为这是项目管理良好的指标，”美国公共人类服务协会政策主任亚历克西斯·库兹尼克表示，“各州正在非常努力地将失误率大幅降低。”
诚然，实际的SNAP欺诈行为代价高昂。美国政府问责局援引此前的数据显示，该项目每年因欺诈损失约10亿美元。
美国农业部5月发布的一份报告指出了其他潜在的欺诈活动，包括使用虚假社会保险号码的受助者和重复参保的情况，这些问题每年可能导致约30亿美元的违规支付。不过，该报告将这些发现描述为潜在问题，而非已确认的欺诈行为。
具有讽刺意味的是，由于“宏伟法案”的要求，各州“不得不将原本用于减少、预防或应对欺诈的工作人员转移到质量控制部门”，以专注于降低支付失误率，库兹尼克说道。
对州预算的潜在打击
根据“宏伟法案”，该项目的支付失误率对SNAP这一由联邦资助、由美国各州管理的项目而言，其重要性日益凸显。
新法律要求各州的SNAP项目将支付失误率维持在6%以下。那些食品券项目失误率超过该阈值的州，将从2027年10月起承担该项目更多的成本。
根据美国农业部上周发布的报告，仅有10个州的SNAP支付失误率低于6%，其中南达科他州最低，为2.5%。数据显示，阿拉斯加州的失误率最高，达到23%。
根据“宏伟法案”，SNAP支付失误率在6%至8%之间的州，将从2027年末起支付5%的福利成本。失误率在8%至10%之间的州，需承担10%的福利成本。而失误率超过10%的州，则需支付15%的成本。
根据预算与政策优先中心（CBPP）的最新估算，基于美国农业部发布的最新支付失误率数据，各州可能需要额外承担90亿美元的SNAP支出。
“各州此前从未需要承担福利成本份额，而根据2025年的数据，近一半的州将面临成本分摊要求，在实施第一年就将面临至少1亿美元的损失，”CBPP的SNAP专家凯蒂·伯格对哥伦比亚广播公司新闻表示。
她表示，这可能导致各州要么提高税收，要么削减其他领域的预算支出。
“我们甚至可能看到一些州完全退出该项目，”伯格补充道，她援引美国公共人类服务协会对全美50个州SNAP机构的调查称，11%的机构将退出食品援助项目列为因预期成本上升而面临的潜在风险。
SNAP支付失误率超过6%的州还有一年时间来减少失误，减轻对其预算的冲击。但那些无法降低失误率的州，可能需要做出可能影响居民的选择，例如在资助执法和教育等公共服务与提供食品援助之间做出权衡。
参保人数下降
这种财务压力正值美国SNAP参保人数自特朗普总统2025年7月4日签署“宏伟法案”以来已大幅下降之际。
根据美国农业部的数据，截至3月（可获得的最新数据），约有3700万人参保SNAP。这比一年前减少了近500万人。
SNAP参保人数的急剧下降源于“宏伟法案”下的项目改革，包括对64岁及以下“身体健康的成年人”实施新的工作要求，而此前的规定仅适用于54岁及以下人群。新规定限制，64岁以下人群若每月未工作、志愿服务或参加职业培训至少80小时，则每三年仅能享受三个月的SNAP福利。
包括代表全美州长的两党组织全国州长协会以及美国公共人类服务协会在内的一些倡导者，目前正在游说议员将修订后的州成本分摊规则推迟两年实施。
“我们一直在努力向领导人宣传这将对各州产生的影响，”全国州长协会首席政策官蒂莫西·布卢特表示，“并请求给予更多时间来实施改革。州长们和各州都非常重视项目的完整性，正不知疲倦地努力降低失误率。”
库兹尼克表示，如果没有时间解决支付失误问题，许多州在成本分摊条款生效后可能会面临艰难的抉择。
“如果某个州无法承担其分摊份额，届时会发生什么？这些都是我们尚未遇到的情况，”她说，“我们知道粮食安全对人们的生计和在校专注能力至关重要。从整体健康结果来看，你可能会看到广泛的影响。”
阿兰·谢特编辑
美联社对本报道亦有贡献。
The Trump administration says the food stamp program is rife with fraud and waste. Is it?
2026-06-29T13:21:00-0400 / CBS News
By
Updated on: June 29, 2026 / 2:09 PM EDT / CBS News
Add CBS News on Google
The Trump administration says the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, also known as food stamps, is losing billions of dollars because of payment errors it characterizes as fraud, waste and abuse. But anti-hunger advocates say that description is misleading, and could threaten food assistance for millions of low-income families.
The Department of Agriculture on June 24 said that the food-stamp program’s payment error rate was 10.6% for fiscal year 2025 — almost double the 6% threshold established as acceptable under the Republicans’ 2025 “big, beautiful bill act” (OBBBA). The error rate last year amounts to more than $10 billion in improper SNAP payments across the U.S., the agency said.
SNAP provided $95.7 billion in benefits to American families during fiscal year 2025, meaning that payment errors accounted for roughly one-tenth of the program’s spending.
Fraud or a mistake?
Conflicting views on the prevalence of fraud in food stamps centers on what the SNAP payment error rate actually measures. Payment errors occur whenever households receive too much or too little in benefits, regardless of whether anyone intentionally broke the rules, and experts say such over- and under-payments are usually unintentional.
Fraud, by contrast, generally involves deliberate deception, such as trafficking benefits for cash or using stolen EBT card information.
The Trump administration has cited the payment error rate as evidence of waste in the program. The metric does not capture many of the most common forms of SNAP fraud, such as EBT card skimming or recipients illegally selling benefits for cash, according to the American Public Human Services Association (APHSA), which represents state and local human services agencies.
A 2024 report from the Government Accountability Office found that SNAP payment errors tend to stem from over- or under-payment issues, while describing food-stamp fraud as a separate, if related, issue.
Payment errors are “mostly unintentional because the policy is very complex, and there are a lot of reporting requirements” that households may not be aware of, Brian Jones, a SNAP quality control expert at APHSA, told CBS News.
Republicans argue that reducing both payment errors and fraud would save taxpayer dollars and help ensure benefits go only to eligible recipients.
“Every dollar in this program is intended to help feed eligible individuals in need,” said Rep. Tim Burchett, a Republican from Tennessee, in a June 25 House subcommittee hearing on “Combating Waste, Fraud, and Abuse in SNAP. “That’s not where every dollar goes, not by a long shot.”
Anti-hunger advocates say that while focusing on fraud is important, erroneous food-stamp payments largely reflect changes in recipients’ personal and financial circumstances, such as getting or losing a job. Mistakes can also result from paperwork problems, such as missing addresses or phone numbers.
“We should not confuse payment errors with fraud,” Gina Plata-Nino, SNAP director for the anti-hunger advocacy group Food Research & Action Center, or FRAC, said at the same hearing. “Fraud involves intentional wrongdoing — payment errors often involve complicated rules, changing work hours, missing paperwork, outdated systems or agency mistakes.”
Recouping overpayments
Under federal law, SNAP recipients must repay overpayments, with states typically reducing the monthly payment until the money is recouped.
“State and counties, those administering the program, should strive to have as low an error rate as possible because it is an indicator of strong administration of the program,” said Alexis Kuznick, policy director for APHSA. “States are working really hard to get their error rates much lower.”
To be sure, actual SNAP fraud is costly. The GAO pointed to earlier data showing the program lost about $1 billion a year to fraud.
A USDA report published in May flagged other potential fraudulent activity, including recipients with dummy Social Security numbers and duplicate enrollments, that could add up to roughly $3 billion in annual improper payments. However, the report described the findings as possible issues rather than confirmed fraud.
Ironically, states are “having to take folks off of their work on reducing, preventing or responding to fraud and move them over to the quality control side” to focus on reducing payment error rates because of the OBBBA’s requirements, Kuznick said.
Potential hit to state budgets
Under the OBBBA, the program’s payment error rate has become increasingly key to SNAP, a federally funded program administered by the U.S. states.
The new law mandates that states’ SNAP programs should maintain payment error rates below 6%. Those states whose food-stamp programs exceed that threshold will be on the hook for shouldering more of the program’s costs starting in October 2027.
According to the USDA’s report last week, only 10 states have SNAP payment error rates below 6%, with South Dakota at the lowest, at 2.5%. Alaska has the highest payment error rate, at 23%, the data shows.
Under the OBBBA, states with SNAP payment error rates between 6% and 8% will have to pay 5% of the benefit costs starting in late 2027. Those with error rates of 8% to 10% will have to pick up 10% of the benefit costs. And those with error rates over 10% will have to pay 15% of the costs.
In total, states could be on the hook for an additional $9 billion in SNAP spending, based on the most recent payment error rates released by the USDA, according to a new estimate from the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, or CBPP.
“States have never before had to put up a share of the benefit costs, and based on the 2025 data, almost half the states are facing a cost-sharing requirement that’s going to cost them $100 million or more in the first year of implementation,” Katie Bergh, a SNAP expert at CBPP, told CBS News.
That could result in states having to either raise taxes or cut spending elsewhere in their budgets, she said.
“We may even see some states withdraw from the program entirely,” Bergh added, citing an APHSA survey of all 50 state SNAP agencies that found 11% identified withdrawing from the food aid program as a potential risk due to higher expected costs.
States with SNAP payment error rates above 6% will have another year to reduce their errors and decrease the hit to their budgets. But states that aren’t able to drive down their error rates will likely need to make choices that could impact their residents, such as choosing between funding public services like law enforcement and education versus providing food aid.
Enrollment decline
The financial pressure comes as U.S. SNAP enrollment has already fallen sharply since President Trump signed the OBBBA into law on July 4, 2025.
About 37 million people were enrolled in SNAP as of March, the most recent data available, according to USDA figures. That represents a decline of almost 5 million people from a year earlier.
The sharp drop in SNAP enrollees is due to recent changes to the program under the OBBBA, including a new work requirement for “able-bodied adults” aged 64 or younger, whereas the previous regulation only applied to people 54 or younger. The new regulation restricts SNAP benefits to three months of aid every three years if people under 64 don’t work, volunteer or participate in job training at least 80 hours a month.
Some advocates, including the National Governors Association, a bipartisan group that represents the nation’s governors, as well as APHSA, are now lobbying lawmakers to delay the revised state cost-sharing rules by two years.
“We have been working hard to educate and inform leaders around what the impacts will be to states,” and to ask for additional time to implement changes, said Timothy Blute, chief policy officer at the National Governors Association. “Governors and states care deeply about program integrity and are working tirelessly to lower their error rates.”
Without time to fix the payment errors, many states are likely to face difficult decisions once the cost-sharing provisions kick in, Kuznick said.
“If an individual state can’t pay its share, what happens then? Those are the sorts of things that we have not encountered yet,” she said. “We know how critical food security is to people’s livelihoods and their ability to focus in school. You could see a widespread impact in terms of wellness outcomes overall.”
Edited by Alain Sherter
The Associated Press contributed to this report.
发表回复