Farm Subsidy information
Riverside County, California
Total Subsidies in Riverside County, California, 1995-2023
Subsidy Recipients 41 to 60 of 930
Recipients of Total Subsidies from farms in Riverside County, California totaled $232,304,000 in from 1995-2023.
Rank | Recipient (* ownership information available) |
Location | Total Subsidies 1995-2023 |
---|---|---|---|
41 | Goyenetche Dairy No 2 | Buttonwillow, CA 93206 | $942,302 |
42 | Salvador Delgado | Riverside, CA 92508 | $922,107 |
43 | Rio Rancho 2000 LLC | Blythe, CA 92226 | $914,391 |
44 | Nish Noroian Farms | Blythe, CA 92226 | $881,261 |
45 | Phil Rheingans | Moscow, ID 83843 | $830,289 |
46 | Dan's Feed & Seed, Inc | Perris, CA 92570 | $812,517 |
47 | Coxco LLC | Blythe, CA 92225 | $797,307 |
48 | Riverview Land Company | Los Angeles, CA 90024 | $785,658 |
49 | Hadley Date Gardens, Inc | Thermal, CA 92274 | $750,750 |
50 | West Coast Turf | Palm Desert, CA 92211 | $750,000 |
51 | Mecca Star Ranches | Mecca, CA 92254 | $734,323 |
52 | Hollandia Farms North | San Jacinto, CA 92582 | $703,428 |
53 | The Cox Family Trust Dtd 100508 | Blythe, CA 92225 | $647,475 |
54 | Kent Seatech LLC | Temecula, CA 92593 | $646,715 |
55 | Ranch 440 | Mecca, CA 92254 | $641,566 |
56 | Triple B Farms Inc | Hemet, CA 92545 | $629,002 |
57 | William Vito Bruno | Nuevo, CA 92567 | $625,347 |
58 | Ts Lemon Ranch Inc | Long Beach, CA 90815 | $617,219 |
59 | Triple Will Farms | Blythe, CA 92225 | $611,561 |
60 | Fisher Ranch III | Blythe, CA 92225 | $611,499 |
* 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.”