Total Commodity Programs in Yuma County, Arizona, 1995-2023
Subsidy Recipients 21 to 40 of 466
Recipients of Total Commodity Programs from farms in Yuma County, Arizona totaled $165,097,000 in from 1995-2023.
Rank | Recipient (* ownership information available) |
Location | Total Commodity Programs 1995-2023 |
---|---|---|---|
21 | Robert Nickerson Farms Inc | Wellton, AZ 85356 | $1,703,255 |
22 | Bruce Williams | Yuma, AZ 85365 | $1,638,161 |
23 | R R C H Moore Custom Farming | Yuma, AZ 85365 | $1,627,381 |
24 | Mohawk Valley Farms Gp | Roll, AZ 85347 | $1,599,964 |
25 | Harvey Farms Lmtd Ptnshp | Yuma, AZ 85366 | $1,525,767 |
26 | Tyson And Stacey Stuhr Farm | Gila Bend, AZ 85337 | $1,473,796 |
27 | Aglynx Supply LLC | Yuma, AZ 85365 | $1,465,942 |
28 | Dome Valley Farms Inc | Wellton, AZ 85356 | $1,437,132 |
29 | Murdock Farms | Roll, AZ 85347 | $1,404,519 |
30 | Curtis Farms LLC | Yuma, AZ 85366 | $1,322,571 |
31 | Nakasawa Farms LLC | Yuma, AZ 85365 | $1,281,032 |
32 | Jake Dunn Farms LLC | Yuma, AZ 85365 | $1,261,016 |
33 | Clint Curry Farms LLC | Yuma, AZ 85364 | $1,257,004 |
34 | James W & Judith K Cuming | Somerton, AZ 85350 | $1,253,039 |
35 | Casa De Lena | Roll, AZ 85347 | $1,242,975 |
36 | Robert And Alys Dunn Jv | Yuma, AZ 85365 | $1,226,152 |
37 | James Osborn Farms | Greenwood, MS 38930 | $1,214,805 |
38 | Topflavor Farms Inc | Yuma, AZ 85366 | $1,179,637 |
39 | Marna Marie Williams | Roll, AZ 85347 | $1,159,779 |
40 | Wayne And Bonavere Stuhr | Wellton, AZ 85356 | $1,149,853 |
* 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.”