Farm Subsidy information
San Benito County, California
Total Subsidies in San Benito County, California, 2021
Subsidy Recipients 81 to 100 of 137
Recipients of Total Subsidies from farms in San Benito County, California totaled $6,293,000 in in 2021.
Rank | Recipient (* ownership information available) |
Location | Total Subsidies 2021 |
---|---|---|---|
81 | Nathan Chang | Hollister, CA 95023 | $4,770 |
82 | Frank Benevento III | Hollister, CA 95023 | $4,679 |
83 | Vern Scattini | King City, CA 93930 | $4,424 |
84 | Ron Bowers | San Juan Bautista, CA 95045 | $4,290 |
85 | Fallon Avery | Aromas, CA 95004 | $4,048 |
86 | Regan Tully | San Diego, CA 92109 | $3,485 |
87 | Jon Cooper | San Lucas, CA 93954 | $3,296 |
88 | Mrs Lynn Cooper | San Lucas, CA 93954 | $3,296 |
89 | John Ivancovich | Hollister, CA 95023 | $3,215 |
90 | Alfred J Bonturi | Hollister, CA 95023 | $3,195 |
91 | Scott Rouhier | Aromas, CA 95004 | $3,166 |
92 | M & M Farms | Hollister, CA 95023 | $2,957 |
93 | Summit Ranch LLC | Paicines, CA 95043 | $2,926 |
94 | Donald Trinchero | Gilroy, CA 95020 | $2,880 |
95 | Scott Menefee | Los Banos, CA 93635 | $2,820 |
96 | R&r Livestock LLC | Hollister, CA 95023 | $2,797 |
97 | George Matheou | San Jose, CA 95125 | $2,727 |
98 | John Hubbell | Tres Pinos, CA 95075 | $2,313 |
99 | J Michael Shields | Paicines, CA 95043 | $2,235 |
100 | Emiliano Gomez-vasquez | Hollister, CA 95023 | $2,226 |
* 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.”