Agricultural Risk Coverage (ARC) Program in Alabama, 2020
Subsidy Recipients 1 to 20 of 2,080
Recipients of Agricultural Risk Coverage (ARC) Program from farms in Alabama totaled $3,568,000 in in 2020.
| Rank | Recipient (* ownership information available) |
Location | Agricultural Risk Coverage (ARC) Program 2020 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Haney Farms | Athens, AL 35611 | $113,206 |
| 2 | John Walton Anderson Jr | Athens, AL 35613 | $89,752 |
| 3 | Dee Farm | Aliceville, AL 35442 | $53,760 |
| 4 | First South Farm Credit Aca ** | Winnsboro, LA 71295 | $50,790 |
| 5 | Newby Farms | Athens, AL 35613 | $45,553 |
| 6 | F & W Farms Inc | New Hope, AL 35760 | $43,927 |
| 7 | Matthews And Gullatt | Scottsboro, AL 35769 | $34,989 |
| 8 | W R Gaston | Pike Road, AL 36064 | $33,826 |
| 9 | John M Neal | Scottsboro, AL 35769 | $31,770 |
| 10 | James Bradley Neal | Brownsboro, AL 35741 | $30,046 |
| 11 | Bragg Farming Company | Toney, AL 35773 | $29,719 |
| 12 | Butler & Son LLC | New Hope, AL 35760 | $29,329 |
| 13 | Tate Farms General Partnership | Meridianville, AL 35759 | $26,930 |
| 14 | Jesse Dee Farms | Athens, AL 35611 | $25,830 |
| 15 | David L Precise Jr | Scottsboro, AL 35768 | $24,596 |
| 16 | Graham Farms | Taft, TN 38488 | $24,578 |
| 17 | Chandler Farming Partnership | Hollywood, AL 35752 | $23,284 |
| 18 | Poarch Band Of Creek Indians | Atmore, AL 36502 | $23,087 |
| 19 | Christopher L Shedd | Holly Pond, AL 35083 | $22,731 |
| 20 | Griffith Agricultural Corp | Dutton, AL 35744 | $22,563 |
* 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.”
Next >>
Federal crop insurance reform vital for incentivizing climate adaptation on farms
Farm Subsidies Ballooned Under Trump
Is Federal Crop Insurance Policy Leading to Another Dust Bowl?
Double Dipping:
The "Farm Crisis" Myth
Crying Wolf