Counter Cyclical Program in the United States, 1995-2021
Subsidy Recipients 21 to 40 of 1,220,071
Recipients of Counter Cyclical Program from farms in the United States totaled $14,984,000,000 in from 1995-2021.
Rank | Recipient (* ownership information available) |
Location | Counter Cyclical Program 1995-2021 |
---|---|---|---|
21 | Tempe Farming Co | Maricopa, AZ 85139 | $3,444,080 |
22 | Killarney Farm Partnership | Jakin, GA 39861 | $3,375,539 |
23 | Pioneer Ranches | Tolleson, AZ 85353 | $3,337,910 |
24 | Condrey Farms | Lake Providence, LA 71254 | $3,331,310 |
25 | H Four Farms III | Buckeye, AZ 85326 | $3,292,975 |
26 | Tohono O'odham Farming Authority | Eloy, AZ 85131 | $3,269,294 |
27 | Benton Farms | Tyler, AL 36785 | $3,227,532 |
28 | Holly Ridge Planting Co | Indianola, MS 38751 | $3,216,325 |
29 | R A Pickens And Son Company | Pickens, AR 71662 | $3,155,090 |
30 | Lahey Farms Ptn | Brownfield, TX 79316 | $3,152,619 |
31 | Minor Brothers Farms Gp | Andersonville, GA 31711 | $3,083,722 |
32 | Starrh & Starrh Ctn Growers | Shafter, CA 93263 | $3,072,684 |
33 | Soudan Farming Co | Marianna, AR 72360 | $3,070,952 |
34 | Falfa Farms 95 | Eloy, AZ 85131 | $3,033,746 |
35 | Ritchey Bayou Farms | Greenville, MS 38703 | $3,033,554 |
36 | Pitts Farms | Indianola, MS 38751 | $3,030,933 |
37 | Catron Cotton Co | Tonopah, AZ 85354 | $3,007,633 |
38 | Mattson Farms | Lyon, MS 38645 | $2,996,110 |
39 | Green Acres Farms | Goodyear, AZ 85338 | $2,980,082 |
40 | Franklin Farms | Newellton, LA 71357 | $2,977,442 |
* 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.”