Farm Subsidy information
Potter County, South Dakota
Total Subsidies in Potter County, South Dakota, 2021
Subsidy Recipients 21 to 40 of 405
Recipients of Total Subsidies from farms in Potter County, South Dakota totaled $23,774,000 in in 2021.
Rank | Recipient (* ownership information available) |
Location | Total Subsidies 2021 |
---|---|---|---|
21 | Anthony Rausch | Gettysburg, SD 57442 | $115,826 |
22 | William Arthur Marks | Gettysburg, SD 57442 | $107,024 |
23 | Ahlemeier Farms Inc | Gettysburg, SD 57442 | $105,580 |
24 | Sma Farms, Inc | Gettysburg, SD 57442 | $104,594 |
25 | Kula Farms Inc | Gettysburg, SD 57442 | $102,096 |
26 | Scott Quiett | Gettysburg, SD 57442 | $101,313 |
27 | Reh Farms Inc | Gettysburg, SD 57442 | $101,163 |
28 | Goebel Brothers Partnership | Gettysburg, SD 57442 | $99,888 |
29 | J & M Farms Partnership | Gettysburg, SD 57442 | $98,826 |
30 | Litzen & Sons Inc | Tolstoy, SD 57475 | $98,735 |
31 | Nick Rausch Farms Inc | Gettysburg, SD 57442 | $96,992 |
32 | Zeigler Farms, Inc. | Gettysburg, SD 57442 | $95,101 |
33 | Craig J Worth Farms Inc | Gettysburg, SD 57442 | $94,527 |
34 | Clifford John Keller | Tolstoy, SD 57475 | $94,367 |
35 | Richard Allan Kaup | Hoven, SD 57450 | $92,780 |
36 | Patrick James Breen | Seneca, SD 57473 | $91,804 |
37 | J B N Farms LLC | Gettysburg, SD 57442 | $91,100 |
38 | R & M Poeppel Inc | Gettysburg, SD 57442 | $90,822 |
39 | Brian J Worth Farms Inc | Gettysburg, SD 57442 | $89,501 |
40 | Duane Keith Quiett | Gettysburg, SD 57442 | $84,238 |
* 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.”