Loan Deficiency in Pinal County, Arizona, 1995-2021
Subsidy Recipients 1 to 20 of 446
Recipients of Loan Deficiency from farms in Pinal County, Arizona totaled $43,696,000 in from 1995-2021.
| Rank | Recipient (* ownership information available) |
Location | Loan Deficiency 1995-2021 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Tohono O'odham Farming Authority | Eloy, AZ 85131 | $3,140,485 |
| 2 | Carranza Farms | Stanfield, AZ 85272 | $1,617,990 |
| 3 | T & G Farms | Arizona City, AZ 85223 | $1,171,370 |
| 4 | Dixon Farms Ptshp Dba Lbj Farms | Wilson, NC 27893 | $1,067,335 |
| 5 | Rancho Pobre Farms | Casa Grande, AZ 85130 | $1,065,114 |
| 6 | S & S Harvesting | Casa Grande, AZ 85130 | $1,015,117 |
| 7 | Dane Farms | Willcox, AZ 85644 | $954,261 |
| 8 | Davis Farms | Casa Grande, AZ 85230 | $647,527 |
| 9 | Pearce Farms Ptshp | Eloy, AZ 85231 | $644,213 |
| 10 | Ruby Farms | Coolidge, AZ 85128 | $605,327 |
| 11 | Raintree Farms | Casa Grande, AZ 85222 | $593,401 |
| 12 | Keeling Family Ptshp | Casa Grande, AZ 85193 | $583,471 |
| 13 | Cardenas Brothers | Eloy, AZ 85231 | $527,106 |
| 14 | Tierra Verde Farms Ptshp | Casa Grande, AZ 85130 | $519,904 |
| 15 | John H Dermer & Son II | Casa Grande, AZ 85222 | $516,728 |
| 16 | Henness & Henness | Casa Grande, AZ 85194 | $491,893 |
| 17 | Donley Farms | Casa Grande, AZ 85193 | $489,258 |
| 18 | Selma Farms Ptshp | Casa Grande, AZ 85130 | $474,560 |
| 19 | Householder Farms | Stanfield, AZ 85272 | $446,282 |
| 20 | Jack & Doris Henness Farms | Casa Grande, AZ 85122 | $441,528 |
* USDA data are not "transparent" for many payments made to recipients through most cooperatives. Recipients of payments made through most cooperatives, and the amounts, have not been made public. To see ownership information, click on the name, then click on the link that is titled Ownership Information.
** EWG has identified this recipient as a bank or lending institution that received the payment because the payment applicant had a loan requiring any subsidy payments go to the lender first. In 2019, the information provided to EWG by USDA began to include the entity that received the payment, rather than the person or entity that applied for it, which was previously provided. This move to shield subsidy recipients from disclosure enables USDA to further evade taxpayer accountability. Six percent of subsidy dollars went to banks, lending institutions, or the Farm Service Agency.”
Next >>
Federal crop insurance reform vital for incentivizing climate adaptation on farms
Farm Subsidies Ballooned Under Trump
Is Federal Crop Insurance Policy Leading to Another Dust Bowl?
Double Dipping:
The "Farm Crisis" Myth
Crying Wolf