TABLE 2—

Arguments for and Against Increased US Department of Agriculture (USDA) Disclosure of Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) Redemption Data Monthly or Annually

Individual Retailer Per Locationa		Aggregate Retailer State-/National-Level Data
Arguments For Disclosure Specific to Individual Retailers	Arguments Against Disclosure Specific to Individual Retailers	Arguments for Disclosure of This Aggregation	Arguments Against Disclosure of This Aggregation
Increase transparency for program.	Would cause substantial competitive harm for retailers.	Increase transparency for program.	Large chain retailers argued that aggregation at a state or national level would have the same drawbacks as at the individual level.
Identify SNAP sales figures for each participating retailer.	Would disclose confidential business information or trade secrets.	Identify SNAP sales figures for participating retailers within a state or nationally.	Retailers with only single outlets argued that they would be at a disadvantage because state/national data would not be aggregated for them but would be aggregated for chains. Some small retailers suggested that large chains but not small retailers should be required to disclose these data.
Identify retailers participating in program.	Not needed to or would not increase transparency for the program.	Identify retailers participating in program.
Fraud detection.	USDA already has a fraud detection program, and regulations already address fraud.
Can be used for targeted interventions/policies in low-resource communities where SNAP use is and is not prevalent.	Would stigmatize stores.
Provide insight into food deserts and food insecurity.	Would stigmatize SNAP beneficiaries.
	Kmart argued that people may assume stores with high SNAP participation are located in areas with more crime or certain racial/ethnic minorities.

Note. Major arguments gleaned from industry and researcher comments on the request for information from the USDA and made during the Argus Leader Media v. USDA case. Arguments were identified multiple times except for arguments identified by an entity. Aggregate de-identified retailer state/national data are already disclosed.

^aNot legally viable after the 2018 Farm Bill amendment to 7 USC §2018, which now prohibits the disclosure of transaction and redemption data of individual retail food stores or wholesale food concerns (which are identified by a unique Food and Nutrition Service number).⁴ The Supreme Court also held that these data cannot be discovered through a Freedom of Information Act request.¹⁶