January 1, 2026
Image Courtesy of Kroger
Should More Grocers Follow Kroger’s Lead?
On Dec. 29, Kroger announced that it was launching what it termed a Verified Savings Program, one which allowed those enrolled to claim a 20% discount on fresh produce — as well as a 50% discount on a Boost by Kroger Plus membership. Eligibility for this program is dependent on interested parties being recipients of various government assistance programs, including SNAP, WIC, Medicaid, and others.
Shoppers looking to avail of this program are able to sign up online via the usage of the SheerID verification service.
“Making fresh food more affordable and equipping more customers with free grocery delivery is an incredible step in expanding food access,” said Carlo Baldan, Kroger group VP of Fresh Merchandising, in a press release.
“With the launch of the Verified Savings program, we are thrilled to make fruits and vegetables more affordable and eliminate one more barrier to food security in our mission to end hunger,” he added.
The news comes as Americans in five states — Indiana, Iowa, Nebraska, Utah, and West Virginia — become subject to new restrictions on what SNAP funds can be used to buy at the grocery store, as of Jan. 1. These five states are the first of at least 18 jurisdictions to see a similar clamping down, with products such as soda, candy, and other so-called “junk foods” being the primary target of the new restrictions.
There are a few other caveat’s to Kroger’s program as well. Customers must have a Kroger digital account and enroll in Verified Savings. Further, verification is only good for five months, with shoppers facing a requirement to re-up their verification after that time frame to remain enrolled.
Heavily Discounted Boost by Kroger Plus Plans May Mitigate Cost of Grocery Delivery for Those Eligible
The heavily discounted Boost by Kroger Plus plans — a 50% discount meaning that Boost Essential comes in at $34.50 per year (or $4.50 per month), and the Boost at $49.50 annually (or $6.50 monthly) — could enhance grocery accessibility for eligible parties via free (in some cases) grocery delivery options.
The Boost program includes the following benefits:
- Unlimited free delivery on orders valued at $35 or more: This delivery could be fulfilled in as little as two hours, although Boost Essential members see this time frame pushed back to next-day delivery.
- Twice the Fuel Points: Each dollar spent on both groceries and general goods — whether purchased in-store or online for pickup or delivery — sees a doubling of value towards Kroger’s Fuel Points program.
There’s also the benefit of free streaming options attached to the Boost program, meaning that eligible customers could also see a reduction in their entertainment expense line. Boost members gain access to either Disney+, Hulu, or ESPN+ as long as they retain membership (and the offer remains on the table), while Essential members get a one-time six-month promo code to one of the aforementioned services.
BrainTrust
Doug Garnett
President, Protonik
Neil Saunders
Managing Director, GlobalData
Scott Benedict
Founder & CEO, Benedict Enterprises LLC
Recent Discussions
Discussion Questions
From a broader business perspective, is this a wise move by Kroger? What are the potential benefits and drawbacks?
Should other grocers follow Kroger’s lead in offering discounts on groceries and grocery delivery to eligible customers on government assistance? Why or why not?
Poll
Loading …
Other grocers should be very careful about what Kroger announced. First, because of their size, they are able to absorb losses no other grocer could absorb. Second, I don’t see any significant advantage to be gained for Kroger — or any other grocer. In return for giving up significant profit on produce, they will (at best) get a few more people to shift away from stores to home delivery. And, that shift is bad for Kroger as in-store customers are always more profitable.
From a broader business perspective, Kroger’s move to offer targeted discounts — like a 20 % off fruits and vegetables and reduced-price delivery/membership benefits to customers on government assistance — can be a smart strategic play in a tough grocery environment. By lowering the effective price of fresh produce and delivery for SNAP, WIC and Medicaid recipients, Kroger is not just responding to affordability pressures but also creating a value magnet that can draw price-sensitive shoppers into its ecosystem when competition for grocery share is fierce. Programs like Kroger’s Verified Savings offer a differentiated experience that reinforces loyalty through digital account enrollment and benefits that extend beyond the initial discount.
Certainly, there are potential benefits to other grocers considering similar offers — especially if they operate in markets with high cost-of-living pressures. These kinds of discounts can drive incremental traffic, convert occasional shoppers, and build longer-term habits that outlast temporary government aid dynamics. However, there are also drawbacks and complexities to weigh: compliance with USDA SNAP equal-treatment regulations has historically limited how discounts can be structured, and some industry commentary suggests grocers must be careful not to violate rules that prohibit special pricing only for SNAP customers without broader waivers or compliance mechanisms. Moreover, margins in grocery are notoriously thin, and offering deeper discounts without a clear path to broader basket growth could erode profits if not paired with strong loyalty and retention strategies.
On balance, I think this kind of value-centric initiative makes sense as a share-gain strategy for grocers willing to invest in loyalty and digital engagement. For Kroger, capturing shoppers who are seeking value elsewhere and giving them reasons to return even as economic conditions improve could pay dividends — both in terms of sales and customer lifetime value. Other grocers should evaluate similar programs not just through the lens of social responsibility but as a competitive differentiator that speaks directly to today’s value-minded consumer. If executed thoughtfully, with compliance and economics in mind, it’s a strategy that could expand market share and deepen customer relationships over time.
To answer bluntly: no; or at least other retailers should think twice (or however many times it takes to pause). However good the intention may be, and however favorable the publicity from this might be (assuming, of course, it is favorable) setting up a promotion that’s intertwined with government prgorams that are under constant attack is ill-considered. Kroeger seems confused: “our mission to end hunger”…no, their “mission” is to be profitable.
Kroger has been losing market share, so it is pulling out all the stops to drive loyalty and spend. I think this initiative helps, but it does not solve the problem of weak value nor does it really defend Kroger against the continued march of Walmart and Amazon (online) in grocery.
Sadly, it all sounds like a very convoluted solution for something that should not even be an issue in America.
Kroger is going after increased spend in the market, which should be expected. These new programs will yield additional revenue, but I don’t see a significant number of grocery competitors taking on all of this work, investment and coordination to make sense on ROI. And from a customer standpoint, the number of hoops to sign up and track purchases against value might just be too much to gain meaningful traction.
I think more grocers should follow Kroger’s lead to address the “nutrition gap” created as 18 states—including Indiana, Iowa, and Utah—restrict SNAP purchases of soda and candy. By offering produce discounts and reduced delivery fees, grocers can mitigate the $1.6 billion industry-wide cost of implementing these complex state-level bans.
However, retailers must navigate the USDA’s Equal Treatment Rule, which prohibits preferential discounts for SNAP users without a formal waiver. While Kroger’s model builds high-value loyalty and improves health outcomes, smaller grocers may struggle with the technical verification and legal compliance required to replicate it.
More Discussions
Did Holiday 2025 Mark a Shift Into the ‘Agentic Shopping’ Retail Era?
Salesforce data suggests that holiday 2025 was the retail period in which agentic shopping turned the…Should Facial Recognition for Theft Get Another Look?
Retailers and consumers are hotly debating facial recognition tech: theft deterrent, privacy overstepping, or both?Will Retail Bifurcation Persist (or Intensify) in 2026?
Recent Placer.ai data indicated a deepening divide within retail, at least pertaining to foot traffic.
Other grocers should be very careful about what Kroger announced. First, because of their size, they are able to absorb losses no other grocer could absorb. Second, I don’t see any significant advantage to be gained for Kroger — or any other grocer. In return for giving up significant profit on produce, they will (at best) get a few more people to shift away from stores to home delivery. And, that shift is bad for Kroger as in-store customers are always more profitable.
From a broader business perspective, Kroger’s move to offer targeted discounts — like a 20 % off fruits and vegetables and reduced-price delivery/membership benefits to customers on government assistance — can be a smart strategic play in a tough grocery environment. By lowering the effective price of fresh produce and delivery for SNAP, WIC and Medicaid recipients, Kroger is not just responding to affordability pressures but also creating a value magnet that can draw price-sensitive shoppers into its ecosystem when competition for grocery share is fierce. Programs like Kroger’s Verified Savings offer a differentiated experience that reinforces loyalty through digital account enrollment and benefits that extend beyond the initial discount.
Certainly, there are potential benefits to other grocers considering similar offers — especially if they operate in markets with high cost-of-living pressures. These kinds of discounts can drive incremental traffic, convert occasional shoppers, and build longer-term habits that outlast temporary government aid dynamics. However, there are also drawbacks and complexities to weigh: compliance with USDA SNAP equal-treatment regulations has historically limited how discounts can be structured, and some industry commentary suggests grocers must be careful not to violate rules that prohibit special pricing only for SNAP customers without broader waivers or compliance mechanisms. Moreover, margins in grocery are notoriously thin, and offering deeper discounts without a clear path to broader basket growth could erode profits if not paired with strong loyalty and retention strategies.
On balance, I think this kind of value-centric initiative makes sense as a share-gain strategy for grocers willing to invest in loyalty and digital engagement. For Kroger, capturing shoppers who are seeking value elsewhere and giving them reasons to return even as economic conditions improve could pay dividends — both in terms of sales and customer lifetime value. Other grocers should evaluate similar programs not just through the lens of social responsibility but as a competitive differentiator that speaks directly to today’s value-minded consumer. If executed thoughtfully, with compliance and economics in mind, it’s a strategy that could expand market share and deepen customer relationships over time.
To answer bluntly: no; or at least other retailers should think twice (or however many times it takes to pause). However good the intention may be, and however favorable the publicity from this might be (assuming, of course, it is favorable) setting up a promotion that’s intertwined with government prgorams that are under constant attack is ill-considered. Kroeger seems confused: “our mission to end hunger”…no, their “mission” is to be profitable.
Kroger has been losing market share, so it is pulling out all the stops to drive loyalty and spend. I think this initiative helps, but it does not solve the problem of weak value nor does it really defend Kroger against the continued march of Walmart and Amazon (online) in grocery.
Sadly, it all sounds like a very convoluted solution for something that should not even be an issue in America.
Kroger is going after increased spend in the market, which should be expected. These new programs will yield additional revenue, but I don’t see a significant number of grocery competitors taking on all of this work, investment and coordination to make sense on ROI. And from a customer standpoint, the number of hoops to sign up and track purchases against value might just be too much to gain meaningful traction.
I think more grocers should follow Kroger’s lead to address the “nutrition gap” created as 18 states—including Indiana, Iowa, and Utah—restrict SNAP purchases of soda and candy. By offering produce discounts and reduced delivery fees, grocers can mitigate the $1.6 billion industry-wide cost of implementing these complex state-level bans.
However, retailers must navigate the USDA’s Equal Treatment Rule, which prohibits preferential discounts for SNAP users without a formal waiver. While Kroger’s model builds high-value loyalty and improves health outcomes, smaller grocers may struggle with the technical verification and legal compliance required to replicate it.