SURE - 2010 Recovery Act Program in California, 1995-2021
Subsidy Recipients 1 to 20 of 1,582
Recipients of SURE - 2010 Recovery Act Program from farms in California totaled $48,745,000 in from 1995-2021.
| Rank | Recipient (* ownership information available) |
Location | SURE - 2010 Recovery Act Program 1995-2021 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Dublin Farms | Corcoran, CA 93212 | $746,198 |
| 2 | Thiara Company | Yuba City, CA 95991 | $591,074 |
| 3 | Visalia Grape Growers | Exeter, CA 93221 | $330,459 |
| 4 | Ronald F Redfield | Woodlake, CA 93286 | $300,000 |
| 5 | Woodlake Ranch Inc | Woodlake, CA 93286 | $300,000 |
| 6 | Daniel Sliskovich | Wilmington, CA 90748 | $300,000 |
| 7 | Aguiar Ranch Inc | Orland, CA 95963 | $300,000 |
| 8 | Newton Bros | Stratford, CA 93266 | $295,395 |
| 9 | Triple B Farms Inc | Hemet, CA 92545 | $286,494 |
| 10 | Juan Nerey | Corning, CA 96021 | $281,562 |
| 11 | Twisselman/clark | Shandon, CA 93461 | $277,556 |
| 12 | Pablo Nerey | Corning, CA 96021 | $232,463 |
| 13 | Rosalio Lopez Curiel | Corning, CA 96021 | $227,035 |
| 14 | Wasco Partnership | Willits, CA 95490 | $226,026 |
| 15 | Elpidio Tapia | Corning, CA 96021 | $224,362 |
| 16 | Padula Ranches | Willits, CA 95490 | $220,934 |
| 17 | Padula Farms Inc | Porterville, CA 93258 | $216,832 |
| 18 | Richard Rowland | Chico, CA 95973 | $200,000 |
| 19 | Estela Guzman | Santa Maria, CA 93454 | $200,000 |
| 20 | Johl Orchards | Yuba City, CA 95992 | $195,016 |
* 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