Counter Cyclical Program in Mississippi County, Missouri, 1995-2023
Subsidy Recipients 21 to 40 of 775
Recipients of Counter Cyclical Program from farms in Mississippi County, Missouri totaled $6,870,000 in from 1995-2023.
Rank | Recipient (* ownership information available) |
Location | Counter Cyclical Program 1995-2023 |
---|---|---|---|
21 | C Fray Morrow | Bertrand, MO 63823 | $62,382 |
22 | Marshall Farms Inc | Charleston, MO 63834 | $62,262 |
23 | J S P Farms | Bertrand, MO 63823 | $61,794 |
24 | Ferrell Farms | Charleston, MO 63834 | $61,483 |
25 | Richard Kelly | Charleston, MO 63834 | $58,930 |
26 | Stanley Craig Sutton | Charleston, MO 63834 | $58,067 |
27 | Daniel J Babb Farms | Charleston, MO 63834 | $57,546 |
28 | James Lee Haines | East Prairie, MO 63845 | $52,714 |
29 | John Hillhouse | Charleston, MO 63834 | $51,509 |
30 | John Wilbur Lindsay Goodin Jr | Charleston, MO 63834 | $51,234 |
31 | Mark Dugan | Charleston, MO 63834 | $50,478 |
32 | B & R Arington Farms LLC | East Prairie, MO 63845 | $49,972 |
33 | Robert M Jackson | Charleston, MO 63834 | $48,373 |
34 | Shelby Fox | Charleston, MO 63834 | $48,028 |
35 | Barnes & Layton | Charleston, MO 63834 | $46,972 |
36 | Stephen Lankheit Farms | Cape Girardeau, MO 63703 | $45,819 |
37 | Margaret Moore Thurmond Family Tr | Charleston, MO 63834 | $45,028 |
38 | Mcivan Jones Farms Inc | East Prairie, MO 63845 | $44,770 |
39 | George C Shelby | Charleston, MO 63834 | $42,435 |
40 | Kenny-kindle Living Kindle | East Prairie, MO 63845 | $41,857 |
* 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.”