Counter Cyclical Program in Sharkey County, Mississippi, 1995-2023
Subsidy Recipients 21 to 40 of 240
Recipients of Counter Cyclical Program from farms in Sharkey County, Mississippi totaled $39,198,000 in from 1995-2023.
Rank | Recipient (* ownership information available) |
Location | Counter Cyclical Program 1995-2023 |
---|---|---|---|
21 | Dean Dean & Dean | Panther Burn, MS 38765 | $610,410 |
22 | Goodman Associates | Holly Bluff, MS 39088 | $584,022 |
23 | C & B Farms | Rolling Fork, MS 39159 | $568,968 |
24 | Howle Planting Company | Anguilla, MS 38721 | $560,736 |
25 | Halzac Farms | Anguilla, MS 38721 | $557,786 |
26 | Coghlan & Sons | Holly Bluff, MS 39088 | $549,586 |
27 | Little Panther Plantation | Leland, MS 38756 | $524,522 |
28 | Panther Creek Plantation | Leland, MS 38756 | $519,132 |
29 | Moore Company | Cary, MS 39054 | $486,270 |
30 | Durst & Durst | Anguilla, MS 38721 | $473,451 |
31 | Clark And Clark Partnership | Anguilla, MS 38721 | $412,508 |
32 | J & L Farms | Holly Bluff, MS 39088 | $411,752 |
33 | Ralph W Mcgee II | Leland, MS 38756 | $330,466 |
34 | Howle Farms | Anguilla, MS 38721 | $282,758 |
35 | Rkb Farms Partnership | Rolling Fork, MS 39159 | $269,156 |
36 | Martin Pltg Co Inc | Anguilla, MS 38721 | $264,433 |
37 | C & J Smith Farms Inc | Anguilla, MS 38721 | $258,734 |
38 | Patterson & Sons Partnership | Anguilla, MS 38721 | $254,062 |
39 | Bonnie Farms | Holly Bluff, MS 39088 | $250,596 |
40 | Hankins Farms Services Inc | Rolling Fork, MS 39159 | $248,885 |
* 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.”