Miscellaneous Farm Programs in Sutter County, California, 1995-2021
Subsidy Recipients 1 to 20 of 253
Recipients of Miscellaneous Farm Programs from farms in Sutter County, California totaled $461,000 in from 1995-2021.
| Rank | Recipient (* ownership information available) |
Location | Miscellaneous Farm Programs 1995-2021 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | M-r Farms | Yuba City, CA 95993 | $150,102 |
| 2 | Danna & Danna Inc | Yuba City, CA 95992 | $91,963 |
| 3 | Taylor Bros Farms Inc | Yuba City, CA 95991 | $47,943 |
| 4 | Murray Buys | Live Oak, CA 95953 | $31,296 |
| 5 | Naumes Inc | Marysville, CA 95901 | $28,295 |
| 6 | Neill Mitchell | Yuba City, CA 95993 | $26,253 |
| 7 | Daljit Kaur Sekhon | Yuba City, CA 95993 | $24,226 |
| 8 | Joseph R Perry | Clarksburg, CA 95612 | $20,000 |
| 9 | Jose Quintero | Yuba City, CA 95993 | $14,354 |
| 10 | Danna Properties Inc | San Jose, CA 95150 | $13,333 |
| 11 | Valley View Packing Company Inc | Yuba City, CA 95991 | $12,546 |
| 12 | Tim And Kathy Garner | Yuba City, CA 95993 | $5,000 |
| 13 | Arjinderpal S Sekhon | Yuba City, CA 95993 | $2,837 |
| 14 | Eastman Ranch | Woodland, CA 95776 | $2,448 |
| 15 | Sjv Enterprises | Nicolaus, CA 95659 | $2,284 |
| 16 | Dale Ranches | Yuba City, CA 95992 | $2,195 |
| 17 | Albert Fruetel Dba Fruetel Farms | Rio Oso, CA 95674 | $1,617 |
| 18 | Matteoli Bros | Robbins, CA 95676 | $1,555 |
| 19 | Johl Company | Marysville, CA 95901 | $1,444 |
| 20 | Irvin Matsumoto | Yuba City, CA 95991 | $1,338 |
* 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