Cotton Ginning Program in Merced County, California, 1995-2021
Subsidy Recipients 1 to 20 of 157
Recipients of Cotton Ginning Program from farms in Merced County, California totaled $4,006,000 in from 1995-2021.
| Rank | Recipient (* ownership information available) |
Location | Cotton Ginning Program 1995-2021 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Wl Goodman & Sons | Dos Palos, CA 93620 | $242,673 |
| 2 | A-bar Ag Enterprises | Firebaugh, CA 93622 | $160,344 |
| 3 | David Carlucci Farms | Los Banos, CA 93635 | $160,000 |
| 4 | S J R Farming | Los Banos, CA 93635 | $158,758 |
| 5 | David Santos Farming | Los Banos, CA 93635 | $144,133 |
| 6 | Gamboni Farming Co | Dos Palos, CA 93620 | $140,852 |
| 7 | Andrews Farms | Dos Palos, CA 93620 | $126,822 |
| 8 | Pierre Perret Farming | Merced, CA 95340 | $126,158 |
| 9 | J P M Ag | Los Banos, CA 93635 | $101,534 |
| 10 | Pentagon Company | Los Banos, CA 93635 | $81,190 |
| 11 | Gilardi Farms | Los Banos, CA 93635 | $80,414 |
| 12 | Lewis Maiorino Ranches Inc | Dos Palos, CA 93620 | $80,000 |
| 13 | Edward And Nancy Silva | El Nido, CA 95317 | $75,774 |
| 14 | Robert Mcdonald | Los Banos, CA 93635 | $70,772 |
| 15 | Pedretti Ranches Inc | El Nido, CA 95317 | $70,376 |
| 16 | Pafford Family Farms Lp | Los Banos, CA 93635 | $69,005 |
| 17 | 4-w Ranch | Dos Palos, CA 93620 | $62,384 |
| 18 | George L Jones Farming LLC | Dos Palos, CA 93620 | $59,544 |
| 19 | Teixeira And Sons | Los Banos, CA 93635 | $59,079 |
| 20 | Joseph & Robin Maiorino | Dos Palos, CA 93620 | $58,410 |
* 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