Cotton Transistion Assistance Program in Kern County, California, 1995-2023
Subsidy Recipients 21 to 40 of 247
Recipients of Cotton Transistion Assistance Program from farms in Kern County, California totaled $5,338,000 in from 1995-2023.
Rank | Recipient (* ownership information available) |
Location | Cotton Transistion Assistance Program 1995-2023 |
---|---|---|---|
21 | Tri-fanucchi Farms LLC | Bakersfield, CA 93313 | $58,957 |
22 | Boschma & Son Dairy | Bakersfield, CA 93314 | $58,501 |
23 | Torigiani Farms | Buttonwillow, CA 93206 | $56,507 |
24 | Skyview Dairy | Bakersfield, CA 93314 | $54,892 |
25 | Kirschenmann Bros | Shafter, CA 93263 | $54,455 |
26 | L Riccomini And Sons | Bakersfield, CA 93312 | $52,830 |
27 | Stenderup Ag Partners | Bakersfield, CA 93307 | $51,677 |
28 | Ugo Antongiovanni Farms | Bakersfield, CA 93301 | $50,889 |
29 | West-star North Dairy | Buttonwillow, CA 93206 | $45,081 |
30 | Crettol Farms | Wasco, CA 93280 | $44,242 |
31 | M & M Farms | Shafter, CA 93263 | $43,146 |
32 | A & A Farms | Bakersfield, CA 93307 | $42,029 |
33 | Jerry Slough Farming Co | Buttonwillow, CA 93206 | $40,419 |
34 | Whiteside Dairy | Wasco, CA 93280 | $37,937 |
35 | Roger Frantz & Sons | Shafter, CA 93263 | $37,230 |
36 | John Romanini & Sons LLC | Buttonwillow, CA 93206 | $37,120 |
37 | Diamond M Farms Inc | Bakersfield, CA 93390 | $37,120 |
38 | Phillip Esnoz | Shafter, CA 93263 | $37,080 |
39 | Denise M Esnoz | Shafter, CA 93263 | $37,080 |
40 | Danny Rodrigues | Lemoore, CA 93245 | $37,080 |
* 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.”