Electronic Benefits Transfer, or EBT, is the system used to deliver food assistance benefits in the United States. These benefits are commonly known as SNAP, which stands for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or sometimes simply “food stamps.” An EBT card functions much like a debit card, allowing individuals and families to purchase groceries at authorized stores. The main purpose of programs like SNAP is to help low-income individuals and families afford nutritious food, ensuring they have enough to eat and do not experience hunger.
Many individuals who receive food assistance wonder if their participation in such programs might influence their chances of getting a job. There’s a common concern that receiving public assistance could be seen as a disadvantage in the job market. This report will explore how employers might learn about EBT usage, whether legal protections exist against discrimination, what current research indicates about employment for people receiving these benefits, and what resources are available to job seekers. By understanding the true purpose of EBT and how it interacts with employment, a clearer picture emerges, often challenging common beliefs.
Does EBT Card Usage Affect Your Hiring?
The straightforward answer is that your EBT card usage itself should not directly prevent you from getting hired. In fact, for many employers, hiring an individual who receives EBT (SNAP) benefits can actually be a financial advantage for their business. This is because of a federal program called the Work Opportunity Tax Credit (WOTC).
When employers ask about your EBT status on forms like Form 8850, their main goal is to identify candidates who make them eligible for these tax credits, not to screen them out. This practice is quite common, especially among large companies in retail or other sectors that hire many entry-level employees. The WOTC is designed to encourage businesses to hire individuals from certain groups who have faced challenges finding jobs, and people receiving SNAP benefits are one of these groups.
It’s important to remember that information about your SNAP benefits is generally private and protected by law. Employers cannot simply look up your EBT usage on public databases or through standard background checks or credit reports. The only time an employer might learn about your EBT status is if they ask you directly on a specific form (like Form 8850) as part of the WOTC program. While it can be difficult to prove if discrimination occurs, the intent of this question is to find out if the company can receive a tax credit for hiring you, which is a positive incentive for them.
How Employers Learn About EBT Use (and Why)
The Work Opportunity Tax Credit (WOTC): An Employer Incentive
The U.S. government offers a special federal tax credit to businesses called the Work Opportunity Tax Credit, or WOTC. This credit is designed to encourage employers to hire individuals from specific groups who have faced significant challenges in finding and keeping jobs. The WOTC aims to promote workplace diversity and help American workers access good employment opportunities.
One of the key “targeted groups” that makes an employer eligible for this tax credit includes individuals whose families receive Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits for a certain period. Other groups that qualify an employer for the WOTC include recipients of Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) and Supplemental Security Income (SSI). This means that hiring someone who receives these benefits can actually be a financial advantage for a business. The WOTC can be a significant financial benefit, generally equaling 40% of the first $6,000 in wages paid to an eligible employee in their first year, which can amount to a maximum credit of $2,400 per eligible new hire. This incentive encourages businesses to consider a broader range of job applicants, including those who might be receiving public assistance.
The table below provides a summary of some of the targeted groups for the WOTC, focusing on those related to public assistance, and the potential benefit for employers:
| Targeted Group | Brief Description/Criteria | Potential Employer Benefit (Maximum) |
| Qualified SNAP Benefits Recipient | At least 18 and under 40 years old, and family received SNAP benefits for at least 3 of the previous 5 months or the previous 6 months ending on hiring date. | Up to $2,400 (40% of first $6,000 wages) |
| Qualified IV-A Recipient (TANF) | Member of a family receiving Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) for any 9 months during the 18-month period ending on the hiring date. | Up to $2,400 (40% of first $6,000 wages) |
| Qualified SSI Recipient | Received Supplemental Security Income (SSI) benefits for any month ending within the 60-day period that ends on the hire date. | Up to $2,400 (40% of first $6,000 wages) |
The Pre-Screening Process: How Employers Ask
To claim the Work Opportunity Tax Credit, employers are required to complete a specific form with the job applicant. This form is called Form 8850, which stands for “Pre-Screening Notice and Certification Request for the Work Opportunity Credit”. On this form, applicants are asked if they have received certain government benefits, such as SNAP, TANF, or SSI, for a specified period.
It is important to note the timing of this process: the form must be completed on or before the day a job offer is made. After the new employee starts work, the employer has 28 calendar days to submit Form 8850 to a designated local agency. This process is specifically tied to the tax credit program and is not a general background check or a way for employers to gather unrelated personal financial information. Large companies, particularly those in retail or other sectors that hire many entry-level employees, are known to use this pre-screening process. The reason an employer asks about EBT status on Form 8850 is primarily to identify candidates who qualify them for these tax credits, which provides a financial advantage to the company.
Privacy of EBT Information
Information about an individual receiving SNAP benefits is generally confidential and protected by law. There are no public databases that employers can access to determine if someone is receiving SNAP benefits. Employers cannot simply call a government agency to inquire about an individual’s EBT status. While applying for benefits may grant the agency permission to contact other entities, such as banks or employers, to verify income if necessary, this does not give employers the right to contact the benefit agency without cause.
Furthermore, EBT usage does not appear on standard criminal background checks. Similarly, EBT usage is not directly listed on consumer credit reports. Although benefit agencies might use credit reports to verify information for eligibility purposes , this is distinct from employers seeing EBT usage directly on a credit check.
The way information is collected for the Work Opportunity Tax Credit (WOTC) highlights a complex situation. While employers ask about EBT status on Form 8850 specifically to qualify for a federal tax credit designed to encourage hiring from disadvantaged groups , the very act of asking this question creates a possibility for unintended consequences. It is a reality that proving discrimination based on any information on a job application can be very difficult. This means that even if a company’s official policy is to leverage the tax credit, an individual hiring manager might still hold personal biases. The government’s need to verify eligibility for a tax credit requires employers to collect sensitive information, which, while legally mandated for the credit, could potentially be misused by individual hiring managers who might harbor biases, even if the company’s official policy is to benefit from the credit.
This situation also brings up a point about the confidentiality of this information. While laws and regulations strongly state that EBT information is confidential and not publicly accessible , and agencies require explicit permission to verify details, there is a practical concern. As one source mentions, “Any information you provide will be kept confidential and will not affect your job, wages, or taxes… but of course there’s not really a way to guarantee that”. This creates a situation where, despite legal frameworks ensuring privacy, the practical reality of human decision-making and the difficulty of proving discrimination mean that the spirit of confidentiality can be undermined, even if direct access to records is restricted. An employer might not see EBT usage on a background check, but if they know through Form 8850, an unconscious bias could still influence their decision, which is very hard to trace or prove as direct discrimination. This shows that while laws provide rights, individuals still need to be aware of potential subtle biases and understand the limitations of proving discrimination, even when information is legally confidential.
Do Employers Discriminate? What the Research Says
Employer Attitudes and Priorities
Studies indicate that many employers generally hold positive views of individuals who receive welfare or public assistance. A significant portion of employers, nearly two-thirds in one survey, reported having hired someone who was on welfare. Encouragingly, most of these employers (94%) stated they would hire another welfare recipient in the future.
For entry-level positions, employers often prioritize qualities such as a positive attitude and reliability much more than specific skills or a high level of education. These are qualities that many individuals receiving public assistance demonstrate in the workplace. This suggests that EBT status is not inherently a barrier and can even be seen as an asset due to tax incentives and the valuable qualities many recipients bring to the workforce.
There appears to be an evolution in employer attitudes towards hiring public assistance recipients. Some older information (from 2016, focusing on low-income women) suggested a notable reluctance, with 59.1% of respondents indicating employers were “often” hesitant to hire welfare recipients. However, more recent research, such as studies by the Urban Institute, points to generally positive views and a high willingness to rehire. This shift might be influenced by economic conditions, particularly labor shortages, which can make employers more willing to consider and actively recruit from a wider range of candidates, including those who receive public assistance. This indicates that societal perceptions and hiring practices are not fixed; they are dynamic and can be influenced by broader economic forces, suggesting that current conditions might be more favorable for EBT recipients seeking employment than in the past.
The Challenge of Proving Discrimination
While the Work Opportunity Tax Credit is intended to be a positive incentive for employers, it remains a challenge to prove if an employer discriminates based on any information on a job application. Even if a company’s official policy is to utilize the tax credit, an individual hiring manager might still harbor personal biases.
Policies that impose strict “work requirements” for benefits, often referred to as “welfare conditionality,” can sometimes reinforce negative stereotypes about welfare recipients, implying they are untrustworthy or unwilling to work. These stereotypes, even if they don’t directly lead to illegal discrimination, can create a less welcoming environment.
The Work Opportunity Tax Credit (WOTC) is a clear policy designed to financially encourage employers to hire EBT recipients. However, despite this positive incentive, some reports and anecdotal evidence suggest that discrimination, though difficult to prove, might still occur. This indicates that a legal framework and financial incentive alone do not automatically erase pre-existing biases or deeply ingrained societal stereotypes. The act of asking about EBT status, even for a tax credit, can inadvertently trigger these biases in some hiring managers. The effectiveness of a policy like WOTC is not solely dependent on its design but also on the prevailing social attitudes and the human element in hiring decisions. The “stick” of work requirements and the “carrot” of tax credits (WOTC) operate within a complex social context where stereotypes can persist and influence behavior, even if illegal. This highlights that “what should be” (no discrimination, positive incentives leading to hiring) can sometimes differ from “what sometimes is” (difficulty proving discrimination, lingering impact of stereotypes), emphasizing that social change requires more than just laws and incentives.
Laws That Protect Job Seekers
Federal Anti-Discrimination Laws
Several federal laws protect job seekers from unfair treatment in employment. These broad protections include Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, and national origin. The Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) protects individuals who are 40 years of age or older. Additionally, the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) protects qualified individuals with disabilities from discrimination.
These laws make it illegal to discriminate in all aspects of employment, including hiring, firing, pay, job assignments, promotions, and training. While these federal laws do not specifically list “public assistance status” as a protected group for
employment discrimination, they can still offer protection to EBT recipients indirectly. For instance, a person receiving SNAP might also be an older adult, protected by the ADEA, or a person with a disability, protected by the ADA. Discrimination against them could then be illegal under these existing federal protections.
State and Local “Source of Income” Laws
Beyond federal protections, some states and local governments have passed their own laws that specifically prohibit “source of income” discrimination. It is important to understand that many of these “source of income” laws primarily focus on housing discrimination. This means that landlords generally cannot refuse to rent to someone just because they use a federal, state, or local housing subsidy, such as a Section 8 voucher, or other forms of public assistance, including SNAP.
While less common than in housing, some local jurisdictions might extend these “source of income” protections to employment. For example, New York City prohibits discrimination based on “employment status” and “credit history”. New York State law also prohibits discrimination based on “Lawful Source of Income” in housing. This suggests that while there isn’t a universal federal law directly protecting against employment discrimination based on public assistance status, specific local laws might offer additional employment protections depending on where a job seeker lives.
The existence of federal laws that protect against discrimination based on characteristics like disability or age, which might apply to EBT recipients, but do not directly protect “public assistance status” in employment, creates a complex situation. State and local “source of income” laws are primarily focused on housing. While some cities like New York City have broader employment protections , this is not universal. This results in a “patchwork” of protections where the level of legal safeguarding for EBT status in employment is inconsistent across the United States. The lack of a uniform federal law specifically prohibiting employment discrimination based on public assistance status means that job seekers’ rights are highly dependent on their geographical location, which can lead to unequal access to employment opportunities and legal recourse.
Even without direct federal protection for “public assistance status,” many EBT recipients belong to other federally protected groups. For example, individuals who are older adults or people with disabilities are often among those receiving SNAP benefits. Therefore, if discrimination against an EBT recipient occurs, it could potentially be challenged if it is found to be based on an underlying protected characteristic that often correlates with public assistance receipt. This illustrates how, while a specific category might not be protected, the overlap of identities (e.g., being an older adult
and an EBT recipient) means that existing broader anti-discrimination laws can still offer a layer of protection, even if indirect.
Beyond EBT: What Really Helps People Get Jobs
The Limited Impact of Work Requirements
Research consistently shows that strict “work requirements” often attached to benefits like SNAP do not actually increase employment or earnings for recipients. Instead of leading to more jobs, these requirements primarily result in people losing their essential benefits, even when many are already working or actively seeking employment.
The reality is that many SNAP recipients are already working, but they often hold low-paying jobs with unstable hours, frequent job turnover, and lack benefits like paid sick leave. They might rely on SNAP during periods of joblessness or reduced hours. Furthermore, these requirements often create confusing paperwork and administrative hurdles, making it harder for eligible individuals to navigate the system and receive the help they need. The consistent findings that “work requirements” do not achieve their stated goal of increasing employment or earnings strongly suggest that policies based on the assumption that recipients “avoid work” are fundamentally flawed and ineffective. This failure reinforces the idea that such punitive policies perpetuate negative stereotypes rather than addressing the underlying systemic issues that contribute to unemployment or underemployment, such as unstable jobs, low wages, lack of benefits, or transportation barriers. The “stick” approach is ineffective because the problem is often not a lack of willingness to work, but rather structural barriers and a mismatch between policy assumptions and reality.
Inclusive Hiring Practices: A Better Approach
Instead of focusing on a person’s past benefit status, effective hiring practices focus on their skills, potential, and creating a welcoming environment for all job seekers. This approach benefits both job seekers by providing opportunities and employers by allowing them to access a broader and more diverse talent pool.
Key inclusive practices for employers include:
- Skills-Based Hiring: Employers can remove unnecessary degree requirements and focus on evaluating the actual skills a person possesses that are relevant to the job. This ensures that qualifications are directly tied to job performance rather than formal credentials that might be inaccessible to some.
- Standardized Interviews: Asking all candidates the same predetermined questions and using objective rating scales helps reduce personal bias and ensures a fair comparison among applicants. This makes the evaluation process more equitable and less prone to individual preferences.
- Clear Job Descriptions: Job descriptions should use clear, accessible language, avoid jargon, and focus only on the truly essential skills and qualifications for the role. This helps attract a wider range of qualified candidates and prevents misunderstandings.
- Financial Support: Offering financial support for early-career professionals, such as paid internships or stipends for relocation, professional attire, or transportation, can make employment more accessible to lower-income candidates. This helps overcome practical barriers that might prevent talented individuals from accepting or thriving in a role.
- Community Partnerships: Partnering with organizations that support individuals with disabilities or from economically disadvantaged backgrounds can help employers find a diverse and talented pool of candidates. These partnerships can connect employers with individuals who might not otherwise apply through traditional channels.
- Alternative Hiring Processes: Some states, like Virginia, have alternative hiring processes specifically for individuals with disabilities to make it easier for them to apply for state jobs. These processes recognize that traditional application methods may not suit everyone and aim to remove barriers.
While some employers might have historical biases , the existence of the Work Opportunity Tax Credit and the growing adoption of inclusive hiring practices represent a significant shift. This shift moves away from viewing public assistance recipients as a “deficit” or a problem to be managed, towards recognizing them as a potential “asset” or a valuable, diverse talent pool. The WOTC makes them a financial asset, and inclusive practices recognize their inherent skills and potential contributions regardless of their past or current benefit status. This evolution is driven by a combination of economic incentives (like tax credits) and an increasing awareness within the business community about the benefits of diversity, equity, and inclusion. It signifies a move from a judgmental perspective to one that focuses on an individual’s capabilities and future contributions, demonstrating that societal and business attitudes are capable of evolving towards more equitable and effective approaches.
Conclusion: EBT and Your Job Search
Key Takeaways
When considering how EBT card usage affects a job search, several important points stand out:
- Privacy of Information: Your use of an EBT card for food assistance is confidential. This information is generally not visible to employers through typical background or credit checks.
- Employer Incentives: If an employer asks about your EBT status, it is usually to determine if they can qualify for a federal tax credit called the Work Opportunity Tax Credit (WOTC) by hiring you. This credit provides a financial benefit to the employer, making your EBT status a potential advantage for them.
- Employer Attitudes: While it can be challenging to prove discrimination, many employers actually hold positive views of job seekers who have received public assistance. They often value qualities such as a positive attitude and reliability, which are frequently demonstrated by individuals in this group.
- Legal Protections: Federal laws protect against discrimination based on characteristics like disability, age, or race, which may apply to some EBT recipients. Additionally, some state and local laws offer specific protections against “source of income” discrimination, particularly in housing, and in some cases, employment.
- Effective Support: Research indicates that policies focused on supporting job seekers with training, removing barriers, and promoting inclusive hiring are much more effective at increasing employment than strict work requirements for benefits.
Knowing Your Rights and Finding Help
If you believe you have faced discrimination in a job search or at work, it is important to know that there are organizations and agencies available to help you understand your rights and file a complaint. The knowledge that EBT status is generally confidential and can be an employer advantage, combined with clear pathways for recourse, helps to address potential anxieties and increases a job seeker’s ability to act.
Federal Agencies:
- Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC): This federal agency handles complaints about discrimination based on protected characteristics such as race, color, religion, sex, national origin, age (40 or older), or disability. The EEOC can be contacted at 1-800-669-4000.
- U.S. Department of Labor (DOL): The DOL includes agencies like the Civil Rights Center and the Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs, which oversee equal employment opportunities, especially for federal contractors or programs receiving federal funds.
- U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA): You can file a complaint with the USDA if you believe you experienced discrimination in a program they operate or assist, including discrimination based on income derived from a public assistance program.
State and Local Agencies:
Many states and local governments have their own Fair Employment Practices Agencies (FEPAs) that can also assist with discrimination complaints. If the discrimination violates both state and federal law, these agencies can often “dual-file” your complaint with the EEOC.
The table below provides a summary of where to get help for job discrimination, including contact information:
| Organization | What They Do/Discrimination Types Covered (Relevant to this report) | How to Contact (General) |
| Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) | Handles discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, national origin, age (40+), disability, and genetic information in employment. | Phone: 1-800-669-4000 |
| U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) | Oversees equal employment opportunity in programs and activities receiving federal financial assistance, and for federal contractors and subcontractors. | Check their website or call their Civil Rights Center: 202-693-6500 |
| U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) | Handles discrimination in USDA-operated or assisted programs, including discrimination based on income from public assistance programs. | Online portal or phone: 1-866-632-9992 |
| State/Local Fair Employment Practices Agencies (FEPAs) | Enforce state and local anti-discrimination laws; can often dual-file complaints with the EEOC. | Use the EEOC’s directory of field offices to find a FEPA near you |