Farm Subsidy information
Tehama County, California
Total Subsidies in Tehama County, California, 2020
Subsidy Recipients 21 to 40 of 364
Recipients of Total Subsidies from farms in Tehama County, California totaled $26,720,000 in in 2020.
Rank | Recipient (* ownership information available) |
Location | Total Subsidies 2020 |
---|---|---|---|
21 | Rumiano Farms | Vina, CA 96092 | $323,154 |
22 | Maywood Farms | Corning, CA 96021 | $319,009 |
23 | Mt Lassen Trout Farms Inc | Paynes Creek, CA 96075 | $312,469 |
24 | Matt Anchordoguy Company LLC | Vina, CA 96092 | $273,474 |
25 | Lindauer River Ranch Inc | Red Bluff, CA 96080 | $272,518 |
26 | Doyle Ranch Inc | Corning, CA 96021 | $272,235 |
27 | Amp Farms Inc | Vina, CA 96092 | $262,856 |
28 | William A Spaletta | Gerber, CA 96035 | $252,240 |
29 | Jennifer Spaletta | Gerber, CA 96035 | $252,115 |
30 | Johnny Vogt Sr | Orland, CA 95963 | $247,525 |
31 | Shasta Livestock Auction Yard Inc | Cottonwood, CA 96022 | $236,637 |
32 | Matt Norene | Cottonwood, CA 96022 | $229,577 |
33 | Lindauer Farm Management Inc | Los Molinos, CA 96055 | $221,825 |
34 | Swaran S Sidhu Dba Sidhu Farms | Fairfield, CA 94533 | $211,094 |
35 | Red Barn Walnut Company, LLC | Los Molinos, CA 96055 | $185,136 |
36 | Jones & Son LLC | Los Molinos, CA 96055 | $181,246 |
37 | Abbey Ranch Inc | Vina, CA 96092 | $173,588 |
38 | Pablo Nerey | Corning, CA 96021 | $168,986 |
39 | Chambers Joint Venture | Artois, CA 95913 | $166,038 |
40 | Raymond Dutro Farms Inc | Gerber, CA 96035 | $164,001 |
* 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.”