The shutdown will halt about $8 billion a month in federal food assistance. Walmart captures 24% of all SNAP shopper spending, according to Numerator’s 2025 SNAP Evolution report—triple Kroger’s share and far ahead of Costco, Amazon and Sam’s Club.

Walmart was the first retailer to accept SNAP online in all 50 states in 2023 and launched the Walmart+ Assist program, which offers half-price memberships for those receiving aid.

“If SNAP payments stop, spending by the lowest income groups will fall,” said Neil Saunders, managing director of data and analytics firm GlobalData. “Walmart gets a plurality of the spending, so it will be hit the hardest.”

This was somewhat epiphanic for me.

I already recognized companies such as Walmart were subsidizing pay through social programs such as SNAP and essential funneling/laundering tax payer money to their executives.

This headline made me further realize they’re not only making taxpayers subsidize wages, they’ve also effectively turned the USD into a form of company scrip. While that scrip can be spent at some other locations I bet a large percent of funneled right back to e.g. Walmart itself. If you already work at Walmart it makes spending your SNAP benefit there easier.

  • FrankFrankson@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    83
    ·
    1 month ago

    I dunno why it says “If SNAP goes dark” becuase it already did go dark. It’s already been a week woth no payments and it looks like nothing is going to change that. SNAP has already “gone dark”.

  • aramis87@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    52
    ·
    1 month ago

    Considering that Walmart is one of the largest corporations benefiting from deliberately underpaying their workers and telling them it’s the government’s job to feed them, I find that my field of fucks is barren.

  • The Picard Maneuver@piefed.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    43
    ·
    1 month ago

    That’s so much money. It’s immensely frustrating that any assistance programs we come up with ultimately become a massive wealth transfer to big companies.

    SNAP, subsidized student loans/forgiveness, Medicaid/Medicare, etc. The market will just happily absorb the free taxpayer money and then still raise prices on everyone because of the increased demand.

    • Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      1 month ago

      and then still raise prices on everyone because of the increased demand.

      Ostensibly because of increased demand, actually due to greed.

    • Barbarian@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      1 month ago

      In a world not run by the rich, for the rich this wouldn’t be an issue. Just tax large corporations over a certain size at a slightly higher rate and redistribute it back down to the poorest, turning it into a loop.

  • CileTheSane@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    34
    ·
    1 month ago

    Yes millions of people can’t access food, but have you thought about the impact this is having on Walmart’s profits?

    • finitebanjo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      1 month ago

      I think its important for people to know there are consequences for supporting fascism. Walmart has been donating to conservative PACs for decades and the Waltons themselves tilt even harder than the company.

      • CileTheSane@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        1 month ago

        I don’t disagree, it’s just so fucking frustrating that people can scream from the rooftops for months/years that “this is bad, bad things will happen” and people will ignore them until it affects them personally or it affects a company’s profits.

        The problem is all the people starving, not Walmart losing less than 1% of their profits. But apparently that less than 1% profit loss is what people listen to. It’s disgusting.

    • ricecake@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 month ago

      Honestly? If it’s what gets people to be fed, I’m okay with doing it because people starving is bad for the economy.
      I’d rather we did at least the bare minimum for the right reason, but I’ll accept the wrong reason. At this point, hoping for more than the bare minimum seems unrealistic when we’re most likely to get the wrong thing for the wrong reasons.

      • Lka1988@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        1 month ago

        “Our profits are in the RED, pls give money daddy govt 🥺🥺” but also somehow still makes record-breaking profits.

        Remember kids, when a company says their profits are in the red, that does not mean they are losing money - THEY STILL MADE A PROFIT. Just not as much profit as last year.

  • n7gifmdn@lemmy.ca
    cake
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    28
    ·
    1 month ago

    What the article doesn’t mention is how many of Walmarts employees are on SNAP themselves.

    • AxExRx@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      1 month ago

      Thats what i thought they were referencing at first. That Walmarts were going to be shutting their doors as all their snap subsidised employees started quitting in search of jobs that they could actually put food on the table with.

      • plz1@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        1 month ago

        Walmart tends to blight communities of similar jobs, once they are established in those communities.

        • Aneb@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 month ago

          Exactly. They corner the market and destroy local industries because Walmart can sell items for a cheaper price

  • Don_alForno@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    22
    ·
    1 month ago

    That’s an aspect of social security nets that’s rarely talked about: They stabilize domestic demand and thereby the local economy.

  • pelespirit@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    1 month ago

    This is the only good news from trump’s term. The waltons losing money in this way exposes who they are, and might piss them off enough to do something.

    • kent_eh@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 month ago

      The waltons losing money in this way exposes who they are, and might piss them off enough to do something.

      As much as I hate the idea of corporate interests having that much influence over the government (any government), someone richer than him complaining could be the only thing that gets through Trump’s mushy head.

    • Pacattack57@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 month ago

      I’ve seen a lot of tik toks that are just veiled racism posts. “Oh look now that snap is gone the store is empty and I don’t see any ghetto people!” Like brother white people are the biggest recipients of snap.

    • treesquid@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      He’s saving them so much in taxes that they can just lose $2 billion and be fine with it. The Walton family is worth almost $500 billion. They don’t give a fuck about this.

      • Brave Little Hitachi Wand@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 month ago

        If a rational person was in their situation, they would see the benefit of taking the loss and making it back. But I don’t know if you become a billionaire by having a healthy relationship with money.

      • BanMe@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 month ago

        Waltons only own 45% of walmart now. There are a lot of non-billionaires that will be pretty pissed if the stock slumps. But many of those will just be regular joes, not the rich folk who have divested and planned ahead.

  • jimerson@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    1 month ago

    I would not be surprised to read a headline soon stating “Walmart to receive government subsidies for lost SNAP revenue.”

    Regardless if SNAP has been funded.

  • aceshigh@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    1 month ago

    Walmart saves money by not paying a livable wage, they save money by not paying taxes, they receive money from the taxpayers who paid into snap. No wonder why they keep making profits year after year.

  • Fedizen@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    1 month ago

    Its funny to me when SNAP is a focal point all the press stops talking about the farmers but obviously somebody is supplying walmart with 2 billion in products.