The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) has granted three new waivers restricting candy and soda from the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Programs (SNAP).
On Tuesday, USDA Secretary Brooke Rollins approved waivers to Arkansas, Idaho and Utah to amend their food assistance programs starting in 2026. The new waivers come on the heels of similar moves from Indiana, Iowa and Nebraska last month.
All six amendments restrict sugary drinks like sodas from the list of allowable SNAP purchases. Four states – Indiana, Iowa, Arkansas and Idaho – go a step further by restricting candy from being eligible for SNAP benefits.
Iowa’s amendment goes the farthest in restrictions by adding popular snacks like baking chocolate, dried fruit leather, some granola bars, sweetened popcorn like kettle corn as well as fruits, nuts, or other ingredients in combination with sugar, chocolate, honey, or other sweeteners.
“I call on every governor in the nation to submit a SNAP waiver to eliminate sugary drinks – taxpayer dollars should never bankroll products that fuel the chronic disease epidemic,” said Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. in a press statement.
The USDA has driven the Make America Healthy Again (MAHA) movement launched during the presidential run for now-HHS Secretary Kennedy. The MAHA movement has used the mechanisms of food assistance managed by the USDA to restructure what and how can be purchased with food stamps.
In May, President Trump issued an executive order demanding that states provide real-time data for federally funded food assistance programs.
“For years, [SNAP] has been on autopilot, with no USDA insight into real-time data. The Department is focused on appropriate and lawful participation in SNAP, and today’s request is one of many steps to ensure SNAP is preserved for only those eligible,” Secretary Rollins said in a statement.
The Trump Administration HHS is also using its sway in public education food systems to push states and cities to remove food dyes and ultraprocessed foods (UPFs) from these programs. MAHA proponents contend that these ingredients are responsible for the rising rates of childhood chronic disease.
California is debating legislation to remove UPFs from public schools, carrying over from the state’s fight against synthetic food dyes.
The battle against Big Soda is not just coming from federal agencies but also at the municipal level. In California, industry group American Beverage Association filed a lawsuit against the city of Santa Cruz over its Measure Z, which taxes two cents-per-ounce on “sugar-sweetened beverages” like energy drinks and soda.
Across the country in Massachusetts, Boston is considering a similar tax intended to benefit public health by making sugary drinks more expensive to purchase. These taxes carry on from a trend in the late 2010s when large cities like San Francisco, Philadelphia, Seattle and Chicago began adopting “soda taxes” in the name of reducing obesity rates.