Farm Subsidy information
San Benito County, California
Total Subsidies in San Benito County, California, 2020
Subsidy Recipients 1 to 20 of 119
Recipients of Total Subsidies from farms in San Benito County, California totaled $9,230,000 in in 2020.
Rank | Recipient (* ownership information available) |
Location | Total Subsidies 2020 |
---|---|---|---|
1 | Dobler & Sons LLC | Watsonville, CA 95077 | $1,450,000 |
2 | Yamaoka Brothers Inc | San Juan Bautista, CA 95045 | $493,675 |
3 | Benito Valley Farms Inc. | Hollister, CA 95023 | $393,748 |
4 | Tonascia Farms Inc | Hollister, CA 95024 | $305,982 |
5 | Rajkovich Brothers Partnership Lp | Hollister, CA 95024 | $293,795 |
6 | Valley Top Inc. | Gilroy, CA 95021 | $255,560 |
7 | F & S Farms Inc | Hollister, CA 95023 | $250,000 |
8 | Everyday Greens | Hollister, CA 95023 | $250,000 |
9 | Heirloom Organic Gardens | Hollister, CA 95023 | $249,337 |
10 | Frederick Flook | Hollister, CA 95023 | $174,970 |
11 | Jm M Farms | Salinas, CA 93915 | $174,964 |
12 | 101 Livestock Market Inc. | Aromas, CA 95004 | $153,157 |
13 | Marsha Habib | Hollister, CA 95023 | $151,635 |
14 | Frusetta Cattle Company | Tres Pinos, CA 95075 | $126,401 |
15 | Agco Hay LLC | Tres Pinos, CA 95075 | $123,585 |
16 | B & R Farms LLC | Hollister, CA 95023 | $119,140 |
17 | M And J French Ranch LLC | Hollister, CA 95024 | $117,055 |
18 | Wayne Shingai | Hollister, CA 95023 | $111,932 |
19 | Sam Lomanto III | Hollister, CA 95023 | $111,287 |
20 | Jayleaf, LLC | Hollister, CA 95023 | $108,531 |
* 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 >>