A Michigan woman is facing the possibility of a decade behind bars after prosecutors accused her of misusing food assistance benefits to fund a home-based baking business.
Authorities allege that 32-year-old Talia C. Teneyuque of Saginaw, Michigan, used her state-issued Bridge Card to buy baking supplies between January 2022 and Sept. 2023.
According to prosecutors, Teneyuque then marketed and sold baked goods on Facebook, generating profit while relying on supplemental food program benefits meant strictly for personal consumption.
She was charged with one count of food stamp fraud of $1,000 or more, a felony that carries a penalty of up to 10 years in prison and a fine of up to $250,000.
Court records show that a warrant was issued for Teneyuque’s arrest on June 30. She was taken into custody on Aug. 4 and released on bond the same day. At her arraignment on Aug. 13, a judge freed her on a $50,000 personal recognizance bond.
Viral Reaction Sparks Debate
Teneyuque’s case quickly went viral after news of her charges circulated online, sparking heated debate about whether the punishment fits the alleged crime.
Critics on social media questioned whether jail time was appropriate for what they saw as a misguided but entrepreneurial attempt to earn income.
- “So she’s using the benefits to fund her business, which will allow her to gain income so she can come off the benefits. That’s a problem?” one Instagram user asked.
- “Why not make her pay it back and call it square instead of giving her over to the prison institution?” another added.
- “Let her repay with her profits, then move on with her life. 10 years is insane,” read another viral comment.
Others speculated about how the alleged fraud came to light, suggesting that someone in Teneyuque’s circle may have reported her.
“The government doesn’t know what she buys from the store. Someone must have told on her,” one commenter argued.
What’s Next
Teneyuque is expected to return to court for further proceedings as the felony case moves forward.
Prosecutors maintain that food assistance fraud undermines public trust in social programs, while critics insist alternative remedies—such as restitution—should be considered instead of incarceration.
