California’s CalFresh Rules Are Changing – Millions Could Lose Food Benefits by 2026

Millions of Californians could lose access to CalFresh, the state’s Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), by 2026 under new federal eligibility rules and funding changes. The shift expands work requirements, shortens benefit periods, and transfers more costs to states, raising concerns about food insecurity and economic fallout across the nation’s most populous state.

CalFresh Rules Are Changing

Key Fact	Detail / Statistic
Estimated Californians affected	Up to 5.5 million
Implementation timeline	November 2025 – October 2026
Key policy change	Expanded work requirements for ABAWDs (Able-Bodied Adults Without Dependents)
Average monthly CalFresh enrollment	2.7 million households
Official Website	California Department of Social Services

Federal Policy Shift Targets CalFresh Recipients

The new CalFresh rules are part of a broader federal overhaul of the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) passed earlier this year. The legislation increases work requirements for able-bodied adults without dependents (ABAWDs) aged 18 to 64 and shortens the period during which benefits can be received without meeting those requirements.

According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), recipients in this group will be required to work, volunteer, or participate in training programs for at least 20 hours per week to maintain eligibility. Previously, many individuals were exempt or qualified under more flexible rules.

“This is the most significant tightening of SNAP eligibility in over a decade,” said Karen Ross, California’s Secretary of Food and Agriculture. “The scale of potential impact on California’s vulnerable populations cannot be overstated.”

California officials estimate that as many as 5.5 million residents could be affected through reduced benefits or complete loss of eligibility if the state cannot offset the changes.

Historical Context: From Food Stamps to CalFresh

The SNAP program, formerly known as the Food Stamp Program, was created in 1964 to address hunger in low-income households. Over the decades, Congress has periodically tightened and expanded eligibility in response to economic trends and political pressures.

• 1996 Welfare Reform: SNAP underwent major changes under the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act, introducing work requirements for ABAWDs.
• 2008–2010 Recession: States, including California, received federal waivers to ease restrictions due to rising unemployment.
• 2020 COVID-19 Pandemic: Emergency allotments expanded benefits and suspended time limits for millions of people.

The current policy represents a return to stricter rules, similar to those imposed before the pandemic, but with fewer waivers and more aggressive enforcement.

“We’re seeing a reversion to pre-pandemic austerity measures,” said Dr. Janet Lopez, a policy analyst at the Urban Institute. “But today’s economic realities — including housing costs and wage stagnation — are much harsher, especially in California.”

Timeline: Major Changes Begin in Late 2025

The first phase of implementation begins November 1, 2025, with adjustments to benefit calculations and utility deductions. The more consequential work requirement expansions and time limit enforcements are scheduled to take effect by October 2026.

Key Timeline Highlights

• November 2025: Reduction in certain benefit deductions such as standard utility allowances.
• Mid-2026: Expansion of mandatory work hours for ABAWDs.
• October 2026: End of several state waivers, triggering stricter federal time limits on benefits.

The California Department of Social Services (CDSS) has warned counties to prepare for a surge in case closures and administrative appeals.

“Counties will face an unprecedented operational burden,” said Robert Jones, director of CDSS. “These rule changes are happening fast, and the people most at risk have the fewest resources to navigate them.”

Impact on ABAWDs and Low-Income Adults

The group facing the largest impact includes able-bodied adults without dependents. Under the new rule, individuals may only receive CalFresh benefits for three months within a three-year period if they do not meet the 20-hour weekly work or training threshold.

Many Californians in this group live in rural or suburban areas with limited job opportunities or unreliable transportation. Others face invisible barriers to work, such as untreated health conditions or unstable housing.

“The data is clear — work requirements do not reduce hunger, they reduce access to food,” said Dr. Lauren Bauer, economist at the Brookings Institution. “Most ABAWDs already face significant barriers to steady employment.”

Real-Life Impact: Voices from the Ground

In Fresno County, 32-year-old warehouse worker Marco Alvarez receives $230 a month in CalFresh benefits. Because his hours fluctuate, he fears he may fall below the new 20-hour requirement.

“If I lose CalFresh, I don’t know how I’ll eat,” Alvarez said. “Rent and gas already take everything I make.”

Similarly, Tamara Williams, a 58-year-old veteran in Sacramento, worries the policy will ignore people with health issues that make consistent work difficult.

“I want to work, but I can’t always do it. The system doesn’t see that,” she said.

These stories reflect a larger reality: nearly one in ten Californians rely on CalFresh to help put food on the table, according to state data.

Broader Economic and Social Impacts

California’s extensive network of food banks is bracing for a sharp rise in demand. Feeding America, a national hunger relief organization, projects that local food distributions could increase by as much as 30 percent over the next two years.

Local Government Strain

Counties will have to manage new reporting systems to track work compliance, increasing administrative costs. In rural areas, these systems may be underfunded or lack sufficient staff.

“This isn’t just about individuals losing benefits,” said Kelly Thompson, CEO of the California Association of Food Banks. “It’s about the strain this places on every part of the social safety net.”

National Context: A Widening Gap Among States

California is not alone. At least 27 states will be affected by the new federal policy. But experts warn the impact will be disproportionate in high-cost states like California and New York, where even modest benefit reductions can push families below subsistence levels.

“In lower-cost states, families might stretch a reduced benefit,” said Dr. Michael Grant, a food security researcher at the University of Michigan. “In California, they simply cannot.”

States with more conservative legislatures have signaled support for the new rules, framing them as a way to encourage workforce participation. Others, like California and Massachusetts, have pledged resistance.

Fiscal Stakes and Political Reactions

The California Legislative Analyst’s Office estimates the state may need to spend up to $1.2 billion annually to sustain current benefit levels through supplemental programs. That figure could climb if food inflation continues.

Governor Gavin Newsom has criticized the federal changes as “punitive and shortsighted,” pledging to explore legal options and state-funded relief measures.

“We will not let Washington dismantle the safety net for millions of Californians,” Newsom said in a statement released June 27, 2025.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture, however, has defended the policy.

“The goal is to promote self-sufficiency and reduce program dependency,” said USDA spokesperson Angela Brooks in a written statement.

Alternatives and Potential State Responses

California officials are exploring waivers and state-funded supplements to reduce harm. Some options include:

• Applying for geographic exemptions in high-unemployment counties.
• Expanding Employment and Training (E&T) programs to help recipients meet work requirements.
• Creating bridge programs for vulnerable populations, including veterans, seniors, and foster youth.

Advocacy groups are also lobbying Congress for legislative adjustments in 2026, citing potential humanitarian and economic costs.

International Comparisons

Unlike SNAP, countries such as Canada and the United Kingdom provide food assistance through broader social welfare systems rather than targeted benefits. In these systems, food aid is often bundled with housing, medical, and employment supports, offering more stable access.

“The U.S. stands out for its fragmented safety net,” said Dr. Sarah Klein, a comparative welfare policy researcher at McGill University. “When federal SNAP rules tighten, there are fewer fallback options.”

What Californians Can Expect Next

The full impact of CalFresh rule changes will unfold gradually over the next year. Anti-hunger groups expect legal challenges, state-level legislation, and increased pressure on local safety nets.

Recipients are being urged to:

• Update contact and employment information with county offices.
• Explore training or volunteer programs that meet work requirements.
• Seek legal or advocacy assistance if they believe they may qualify for exemptions.

Forward-Looking Statement

California’s political leadership faces a difficult balancing act: protecting residents while complying with federal mandates. The outcome of legal and policy battles over the next 18 months will determine whether millions lose access to one of the state’s most vital safety net programs — or whether the state can carve out exceptions to soften the blow.

Social Security 2026 COLA Is 2.8%, But Many Seniors Are Still Struggling – Check Details

Texas Families Can Get Up to $1,751 in SNAP Benefits This Month – How to Claim Yours

FAQ About California’s CalFresh Rules Are Changing