Will federal SNAP benefits be reduced or restricted by legislation signed into law by December 31, 2026?

The legislative landscape remains essentially unchanged from the initial prediction. No SNAP-specific legislation has been introduced. The MFP pharmacy legislation demonstrates that Congress can pass laws affecting low-income consumers, but MFP was bipartisan healthcare policy with a different political calculus than SNAP benefit reduction. Budget reconciliation remains the most viable vehicle for SNAP work requirements, and the deficit reduction environment persists. The ~10 month remaining timeline from no-current-proposal to signed law is tight but achievable through reconciliation. Maintaining my prior estimate -- the update provides no material new information on SNAP legislative probability.

The MFP pharmacy legislation precedent cuts both ways. On one hand, it shows Congress is willing to legislate on issues affecting low-income consumers. On the other hand, MFP was a bipartisan measure targeting pharmaceutical companies, not a politically divisive cut to safety net programs. The political dynamics are fundamentally different: SNAP cuts face opposition from agricultural states, progressive members, and poverty advocates, while pharmacy pricing reform had broad popular support. The government shutdown's brief benefit interruption underscores WMT's transfer payment exposure but is noise for this market (shutdowns are temporary, not legislative restructuring). The continued absence of any SNAP-specific proposal remains the dominant bearish factor. Historical precedent (2018 Farm Bill rejection of work requirements) still constrains the probability.

The political dynamics present a nuanced picture. Consumers with 'wallets stretched' and living paycheck-to-paycheck increases the political cost of SNAP cuts, which should decrease probability. However, fiscal pressure from deficits increases the appetite for spending reduction, which could include SNAP. The MFP passage demonstrates Congressional willingness to legislate in areas affecting healthcare costs for low-income populations. Critically, SNAP work requirements are distinct from benefit cuts in political framing -- they can be positioned as pro-employment rather than anti-poor. The reconciliation vehicle remains available. With ~10 months remaining, there is still sufficient time if SNAP is included in a budget reconciliation package. The broad resolution criteria (work requirements reducing participation) continue to warrant placement at the upper end of the 10-20% base range. Slight upward adjustment from prior 0.25 is unwarranted given no new SNAP-specific information.

The material update provides minimal new information directly relevant to SNAP legislation probability. The MFP pharmacy legislation shows Congress is legislatively active but in a bipartisan healthcare context, not the politically divisive safety net space. The government shutdown briefly interrupted benefits but resolved quickly -- this is a temporary administrative event, not a legislative restructuring. No SNAP-specific proposals have emerged. The timeline is now slightly tighter (~10 months). Balancing all factors, the previous aggregate of 0.20 remains well-calibrated. The Black Swan Beacon's 10-20% range and broad resolution criteria (work requirements) continue to justify this midpoint estimate.

Analyzing the resolution criteria carefully: 'measurably reduce participation' through work requirements remains the most probable pathway to YES. Work requirements were part of the 2024 Fiscal Responsibility Act (debt ceiling deal) for ages 50-54, establishing recent precedent for incremental SNAP work requirement expansion. The question is whether Congress expands further in 2026. The MFP passage confirms this Congress is willing to pass legislation with fiscal impact on healthcare spending. Budget reconciliation could include SNAP work requirement expansion as a scored savings item. The definition is broad enough that even modest work requirement expansion -- if it measurably reduces participation rolls -- would resolve YES. I maintain slightly above the midpoint of the base range given the definitional breadth and reconciliation vehicle availability.

Calibrating against the previous batch aggregate of 0.20, I assess whether the update warrants any shift. The core evidence has not changed: no SNAP legislation pending, bipartisan resistance to SNAP cuts, political cost in a difficult economic environment for low-income consumers. The MFP legislation is a red herring for SNAP probability -- pharmacy pricing reform and SNAP benefit reduction occupy entirely different political spaces. The government shutdown's benefit interruption, if anything, highlights the political sensitivity of disrupting transfer payments. The continued absence of legislative proposals after 7 weeks of the new Congress is mildly bearish -- if SNAP reform were a priority, we would expect to see at least committee-level discussion by now. I adjust slightly downward from the prior aggregate.

Base rate from Black Swan Beacon: 10-20%. No SNAP-specific legislation pending. MFP passage shows Congress legislating on consumer issues but is weak precedent. Government shutdown benefit interruption is temporary. Timeline compressed to ~10 months. Anchoring at slightly below previous aggregate given no new SNAP-specific momentum.

MFP passage shows Congress can act quickly on legislation affecting low-income consumers, which is a marginally positive signal for SNAP reform probability. Work requirements remain the most viable pathway. Reconciliation vehicle available. Broad resolution criteria favor YES relative to narrow benefit-cut-only framing. Deficit pressure persists. But no specific SNAP proposals offset this. Net: approximately unchanged from prior assessment.

No SNAP proposals after 7 weeks of Congress. Stretched low-income consumers increase political cost of SNAP cuts. Government shutdown briefly disrupted benefits, highlighting sensitivity. MFP is bipartisan healthcare, not safety net cuts. Timeline now tighter. Leaning toward lower end of 10-20% range given absence of any legislative signals.