Counter Cyclical Program in Louisiana, 1995-2023
Subsidy Recipients 41 to 60 of 30,047
Recipients of Counter Cyclical Program from farms in Louisiana totaled $635,828,000 in from 1995-2023.
Rank | Recipient (* ownership information available) |
Location | Counter Cyclical Program 1995-2023 |
---|---|---|---|
41 | Dominick Farms | Mira, LA 71044 | $971,270 |
42 | G F & C | Fort Necessity, LA 71243 | $967,544 |
43 | Briarfield Plantation | Shreveport, LA 71161 | $964,734 |
44 | Oak Grove Partnership Of Pointe C | Lettsworth, LA 70753 | $961,980 |
45 | H E Harper Farms | Cheneyville, LA 71325 | $949,564 |
46 | Big P Planting Co | Oak Ridge, LA 71264 | $944,305 |
47 | W-e Martin Farms | Lake Providence, LA 71254 | $943,516 |
48 | Stutts Farms | Bonita, LA 71223 | $943,036 |
49 | J & C Matt Partnership | Alexandria, LA 71303 | $935,732 |
50 | 3-b Farms Partnership | Lake Providence, LA 71254 | $924,077 |
51 | Bayou Camitte Plantation | Cloutierville, LA 71416 | $923,144 |
52 | D And D Farms | Tallulah, LA 71282 | $916,582 |
53 | Lakeland Planting Company | Ferriday, LA 71334 | $905,454 |
54 | Wiggers Farm Partnership | Fort Necessity, LA 71243 | $904,425 |
55 | Earl Carroll & Sons A Ptnsh | Gilbert, LA 71336 | $900,072 |
56 | Four Oaks Farms | Morganza, LA 70759 | $894,940 |
57 | Wood Farms | Natchez, MS 39120 | $885,792 |
58 | Red Gum Planting Co No 2 | Ferriday, LA 71334 | $883,092 |
59 | Somerset Plantation | Newellton, LA 71357 | $882,775 |
60 | Wilkerson Farms III | Newellton, LA 71357 | $860,920 |
* 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.”