Farm Subsidy information
San Benito County, California
Total Subsidies in San Benito County, California, 1995-2023
Subsidy Recipients 61 to 80 of 567
Recipients of Total Subsidies from farms in San Benito County, California totaled $60,327,000 in from 1995-2023.
Rank | Recipient (* ownership information available) |
Location | Total Subsidies 1995-2023 |
---|---|---|---|
61 | Sierra West Livestock LLC | Winnemucca, NV 89445 | $164,366 |
62 | Wayne Shingai | Hollister, CA 95023 | $160,945 |
63 | Donald Trinchero | Gilroy, CA 95020 | $159,834 |
64 | Las Aguilas Corp | Hollister, CA 95024 | $156,935 |
65 | 3-d Dairy | Hollister, CA 95023 | $154,579 |
66 | William Freitas & Son Inc | Hollister, CA 95023 | $147,839 |
67 | Five Oaks Ptshp Dba Spur Ranch | King City, CA 93930 | $146,670 |
68 | Perry Orchards Inc | San Juan Bautista, CA 95045 | $145,641 |
69 | William J Donati | Hollister, CA 95023 | $142,387 |
70 | Stirewalt Farm And Truck | Hollister, CA 95023 | $141,977 |
71 | Robert Andre | Hollister, CA 95023 | $140,109 |
72 | Gerardo Rogelio Alcala Gomez | Hollister, CA 95023 | $138,176 |
73 | Emama Mar Eshai Shimun | Hollister, CA 95023 | $135,908 |
74 | Jeff Hall | Hollister, CA 95023 | $133,862 |
75 | Bouquets Of Nature Inc. | San Martin, CA 95046 | $130,669 |
76 | Pereira Dairy | Hollister, CA 95023 | $128,815 |
77 | Sam Lomanto III | Hollister, CA 95023 | $125,849 |
78 | , | $125,000 | |
79 | M & M Farms | Hollister, CA 95023 | $124,684 |
80 | Pine Rock Ranch | Paicines, CA 95043 | $124,172 |
* 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.”