The Census Bureau’s annual poverty report released today puts the Official Poverty Measure at 10.2 percent for 2025, down from 10.6 percent in 2024, while the Supplemental Poverty Measure stands at 13.1 percent, up from 12.9 percent.

But the Cato Institute’s Romina Boccia, director of budget and entitlement policy, argues that both measures give an inaccurate picture of poverty in America and make it difficult to assess whether more than $1 trillion in annual welfare spending is achieving its intended results.

The Official Poverty Measure excludes much of the government assistance low-income households receive, while the Supplemental Poverty Measure counts more benefits but adjusts its poverty threshold based on household spending. More comprehensive measures that account for a fuller range of income and benefits suggest the poverty rate could be below 2 percent.

Boccia shared the following statement:

“The official poverty measure ignores roughly 90 cents of every dollar the federal government spends on major welfare programs. The supplemental measure counts more of that assistance, but it functions like a relative measure by moving the goalposts.”

“Taxpayers are spending more than a trillion dollars each year on welfare programs. They deserve a poverty measure that counts the resources households receive and applies a consistent standard over time.”

“Without a comprehensive and consistent measure, it’s impossible to assess whether welfare spending is producing its intended results or merely replacing household earnings with government subsidies.”

If you’d like to speak with Romina about the new poverty numbers or how the federal government measures the effectiveness of welfare programs, I’m happy to connect you.

Best,

Ryan Carver
Media Relations Manager
540–589‑0573
Cato Institute
1000 Massachusetts Avenue, N.W.
Washington, DC 20001