Production Flexibility Program in Arizona, 1995-2023
Subsidy Recipients 141 to 160 of 2,099
Recipients of Production Flexibility Program from farms in Arizona totaled $272,223,000 in from 1995-2023.
Rank | Recipient (* ownership information available) |
Location | Production Flexibility Program 1995-2023 |
---|---|---|---|
141 | Colvin Farms | Eden, AZ 85535 | $415,192 |
142 | Dixon Farms Ptshp Dba Lbj Farms | Wilson, NC 27893 | $410,750 |
143 | England Farming Ptshp | Casa Grande, AZ 85193 | $410,630 |
144 | Peterson Farms 95 | Gilbert, AZ 85234 | $410,620 |
145 | Barney Farms 92 | Queen Creek, AZ 85142 | $409,860 |
146 | Dickson Farming Co | Yuma, AZ 85365 | $407,915 |
147 | Cimarron Farms 95 | Casa Grande, AZ 85230 | $407,680 |
148 | S & L Farms Ptn 93 | Palo Verde, AZ 85343 | $406,448 |
149 | Triple M Farms 95 | Gilbert, AZ 85234 | $404,984 |
150 | Barnes Farms | Queen Creek, AZ 85242 | $404,460 |
151 | D & M Farms | Monmouth, OR 97361 | $403,919 |
152 | Ratliff Farms Enterprises | San Simon, AZ 85632 | $402,618 |
153 | Jpl Farms | Goodyear, AZ 85338 | $402,042 |
154 | Morning Star Farms | Coolidge, AZ 85128 | $399,848 |
155 | Paloma Partners II | Litchfield Park, AZ 85340 | $399,830 |
156 | Carver Mountain Enterprises | Laveen, AZ 85339 | $399,128 |
157 | Greer Farms 91 | Tolleson, AZ 85353 | $399,028 |
158 | L-t-j Farming Co | Mesa, AZ 85215 | $397,212 |
159 | Davis Farms | Casa Grande, AZ 85130 | $391,049 |
160 | Don Pew Farms | Queen Creek, AZ 85142 | $389,203 |
* 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.”