Loan Deficiency in Yolo County, California, 1995-2021
Subsidy Recipients 1 to 20 of 1,011
Recipients of Loan Deficiency from farms in Yolo County, California totaled $14,612,000 in from 1995-2021.
| Rank | Recipient (* ownership information available) |
Location | Loan Deficiency 1995-2021 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | River Garden Farms Company | Knights Landing, CA 95645 | $767,241 |
| 2 | Hermle Farms | Zamora, CA 95698 | $374,553 |
| 3 | Wallace Ranches | Woodland, CA 95776 | $368,717 |
| 4 | Joe Heidrick Enterprises Inc | Woodland, CA 95695 | $365,786 |
| 5 | Donald W Beeman | Woodland, CA 95695 | $320,342 |
| 6 | B V Farms | Woodland, CA 95695 | $301,256 |
| 7 | Muller Ranch LLC | Woodland, CA 95695 | $292,178 |
| 8 | Tim Mcgahey Dba Ricon Farming | Rancho Murieta, CA 95683 | $272,411 |
| 9 | Button & Turkovich, LLC | Winters, CA 95694 | $249,189 |
| 10 | M & F Farms | Woodland, CA 95695 | $245,784 |
| 11 | D H Breckenridge And Sons | Woodland, CA 95695 | $244,983 |
| 12 | Richard & Chad Zoller | Williams, CA 95987 | $232,433 |
| 13 | George Jimenez | Arbuckle, CA 95912 | $229,050 |
| 14 | Deborah Jimenez | Arbuckle, CA 95912 | $229,050 |
| 15 | Payne Farms | Knights Landing, CA 95645 | $220,296 |
| 16 | Zoller Farms Inc | Colusa, CA 95932 | $213,986 |
| 17 | Kelly Farms | Williams, CA 95987 | $213,785 |
| 18 | J H Meek & Sons Inc | Woodland, CA 95776 | $209,116 |
| 19 | Beeman Farming Corporation | Woodland, CA 95776 | $187,037 |
| 20 | Fred & Eric Tenhunfeld | Woodland, CA 95695 | $185,677 |
* 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