Trump's 'big, beautiful' tax bill risks food assistance for tens of thousands of Coloradans, think tanks estimate

DENVER — President Donald Trump’s “big, beautiful” tax bill would jeopardize food assistance for tens of thousands of low-income Coloradans, while requiring the state to pick up tens of millions of dollars in new spending, according to analyses from two think tanks.

Trump and House Republicans’ bill, which passed the U.S. House on May 22, would seek to offset $4.5 trillion in tax cuts in part by cutting nearly $286 billion from the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program — or SNAP — by 2034.

The reductions would include new work requirements, capping a program that provides dietary planning, shifting more costs to the state, and barring non-permanent residents — including people in the U.S. legally — from accessing the program.

The bill also proposes $700 billion in cuts to Medicaid, which has drawn significant criticism from Democrats and health care providers.

But the impacts to SNAP have received less attention. Republicans have cast the changes as necessary to ensure the program accomplished its goal.

U.S. Rep. Lauren Boebert, who represents the Eastern Plains, said Friday that she supported stricter work requirements to ensure “able-bodied adults without dependents” are working. She said the bill’s requirements would curb federal spending, which she argued had “exploded” within SNAP in recent years.

“If you’re able to work, then you should go to work,” she said. “Even the Bible says if you don’t work, you don’t eat. There’s a lot of pride that comes with earning a living and going out and being a part of the workforce.”

But Democrats and advocates warn that the bill will instead endanger food access for vulnerable Coloradans, and they point to research showing that work requirements are effective at stripping people of benefits — but not at boosting employment. Roughly 131,000 low-income Coloradans — nearly 20% of the people who receive SNAP — could lose access to the program under the bill’s work requirements, according to the left-leaning Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. That’s among roughly 3.2 million people at risk nationwide.

The bill is “going to increase hunger, I think it’s going to increase hardship,” said Anya Rose, the director of public policy at Hunger Free Colorado. “This is slashing support for 1 in 10 Coloradans who rely on SNAP. And then it’s shifting billions in costs to the states.”

Filling the hole left by Congress, she continued, “would be incredibly difficult.”

10% of state uses SNAP

The program provides money for low-income people to buy food. In Colorado, a family of four making a maximum of $62,400 a year would qualify. Qualifying households receive benefits on a monthly basis, ranging from a maximum of $292 for a single-person household to $1,756 for an eight-person home. The benefits can be spent on a variety of foods but not alcohol, hot foods or other household items.

More than 615,000 Coloradans have used SNAP benefits this fiscal year, according to data from the U.S. Department of Agriculture. That amounts to just over 10% of the state.

According to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, 64% of SNAP recipients in Colorado are families with children, and 46% of them are in working families.

But under the tax bill, benefits would be at risk for more than 20% of those residents, according to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities’ estimates. Simultaneously, the legislation would add as much as $259 million in new annual costs to a cash-strapped Colorado in the coming years,

The proposal is now in the Senate, where it’s likely to undergo additional changes. All four of Colorado’s House Republicans voted for the bill, while its four Democratic lawmakers voted against it.

Senate Republicans have already expressed some concern about the depth of the SNAP cuts, according to The Hill. Republican House Speaker Mike Johnston has asked his Senate colleagues to leave the bill largely unchanged, while Trump has said he expects “fairly significant” alterations.

The Colorado Department of Human Services, which oversees SNAP in the state, declined interview requests, and spokespeople would not say if the agency had estimated how many Coloradans could lose access to food benefits under the bill.

Spokeswoman AnneMarie Harper said the state “can’t speculate on what impacts (the bill) could have on Colorado and the people (the department) is honored to serve.”

Outside groups have provided such estimates. Under the proposal passed by one vote in the House, work requirements would be expanded to include adults up to retirement age who either don’t live with children or who have kids over the age of 7.

The Urban Institute estimates that 22,000 Colorado families in the state would lose some or all of their SNAP benefits under the new work requirements, while the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities puts the number at 131,000 people at risk of losing benefits.

The two think tanks rely on different datasets: CBPP uses SNAP data, while the Urban Institute uses a model based on Census Bureau information, said Dottie Rosenbaum, CBPP’s director of federal SNAP policy. CBPP’s estimates are also based on individuals, while Urban’s projections are for families.

Harper did not respond when asked about the groups’ estimates.

‘Responsibly reforming SNAP benefits’

Other than Boebert, Colorado’s House Republicans — U.S. Reps. Gabe Evans, Jeff Crank and Jeff Hurd — either declined or did not respond to interview requests Thursday.

In statements and prior interviews, all four heralded the advancement of the tax bill as a win for the state. At a news conference Thursday, Evans said that “fearmongering” had obscured the benefits delivered by the tax bill, which included increased border security.

The SNAP changes represent “another example of a common-sense reform that Congress is implementing through this legislation, making sure that SNAP benefits go to the most needy, that we’re not wasting federal resources, and that states have incentives to utilize these SNAP benefits effectively,” Hurd told the Grand Junction Daily Sentinel.

While the work requirement changes will create new barriers for entry to the program, other proposals would undercut SNAP’s funding. Under current law, the federal government pays 100% of the cost of SNAP benefits, while it evenly splits administrative costs with the states.

But House Republicans’ bill would require states to begin paying at least 5% of the cost of the benefits by 2028, plus 75% of the administrative costs. While the new administrative toll would shift more than $40 million in new spending to Colorado’s coffers, the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities estimates that the new benefit cost would require the state to pay another $259 million more starting in fiscal year 2028.

That’s driven in large part because the tax bill would require the state to pay higher amounts depending on its error rate, which is based on the accuracy of eligibility requirements and payment. Colorado’s error rate was 8.6% in fiscal year 2023, according to USDA data.

If that were the error rate in 2028, when this change would come into effect, that would mean the state would have to assume 20% of the program’s cost going forward.

Harper confirmed the 2023 error rate but declined to comment on it.

It’s impossible to forecast the state’s fiscal outlook three years from now. But adding roughly $300 million in new costs would be a significant addition to the state’s budget. What’s more, a decline in SNAP and Medicaid enrollment would mean fewer children receiving federally funded school meals, Rose said, which will place additional costs on the state’s meals program.

Colorado’s current budget situation is grim: Lawmakers had to scale back roughly $1.2 billion in spending this year and have warned that next year will be even worse. That bleak outlook doesn’t include steep cuts to SNAP and Medicaid that are part of Congressional Republicans’ tax and budget discussions.

The scale of those reductions could require lawmakers to return to the Capitol for a special session in the coming months.

“I look to this as being something potentially catastrophic to many families,” Rep. Shannon Bird, a Westminster Democrat and the vice-chair of the state’s Joint Budget Committee, told reporters of the SNAP cuts Thursday. “And something the state will have significant challenges backfilling.”

_____