Total Commodity Programs in Greene County, Arkansas, 1995-2021
Subsidy Recipients 21 to 40 of 3,823
Recipients of Total Commodity Programs from farms in Greene County, Arkansas totaled $397,209,000 in from 1995-2021.
Rank | Recipient (* ownership information available) |
Location | Total Commodity Programs 1995-2021 |
---|---|---|---|
21 | James Allen Russom | Beech Grove, AR 72412 | $1,891,192 |
22 | J & T Farms Ptr | Beech Grove, AR 72412 | $1,874,525 |
23 | S & S Farms Ptr | Paragould, AR 72450 | $1,835,937 |
24 | Stacey Rice | Paragould, AR 72450 | $1,800,646 |
25 | Shane Henson | Beech Grove, AR 72412 | $1,754,937 |
26 | Boling Farms Partnership | Paragould, AR 72450 | $1,753,238 |
27 | Kenneth Newberry | Paragould, AR 72450 | $1,707,240 |
28 | Emma Lou Felty | Paragould, AR 72450 | $1,705,151 |
29 | Fielder Farms Partnership | Bono, AR 72416 | $1,685,734 |
30 | Danny Rice | Paragould, AR 72450 | $1,679,222 |
31 | R & J Farms Inc | Paragould, AR 72450 | $1,678,968 |
32 | Bonnie Felty | Paragould, AR 72450 | $1,611,597 |
33 | Clifton E Carter Sr | Marmaduke, AR 72443 | $1,587,585 |
34 | Farm Credit Midsouth Pca ** | Barton, AR 72312 | $1,574,356 |
35 | Clift E Carter Jr | Marmaduke, AR 72443 | $1,535,449 |
36 | H & H Brothers Inc | Paragould, AR 72450 | $1,516,496 |
37 | Ronald Pigue Jr | Paragould, AR 72450 | $1,512,925 |
38 | Gary Felty | Paragould, AR 72450 | $1,508,410 |
39 | Terry E Smith Farms Inc | Paragould, AR 72450 | $1,477,879 |
40 | Natclay Farms Inc | Paragould, AR 72450 | $1,448,455 |
* 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.”