Loan Deficiency in Palm Beach County, Florida, 1995-2021
Subsidy Recipients 1 to 20 of 20
Recipients of Loan Deficiency from farms in Palm Beach County, Florida totaled $1,482,000 in from 1995-2021.
| Rank | Recipient (* ownership information available) |
Location | Loan Deficiency 1995-2021 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | New Hope Sugar Company | Loxahatchee, FL 33470 | $375,000 |
| 2 | Roth Farms Inc | Belle Glade, FL 33430 | $344,476 |
| 3 | Hundley Farms Inc | Loxahatchee, FL 33470 | $238,173 |
| 4 | Wedgworth Farms Inc | Belle Glade, FL 33430 | $209,800 |
| 5 | Mark J Mccoy | Loxahatchee, FL 33470 | $104,463 |
| 6 | Okeelanta Corporation | Loxahatchee, FL 33470 | $75,000 |
| 7 | Stofin Company Inc | Loxahatchee, FL 33470 | $48,972 |
| 8 | Gentry Apiaries Inc | Loxahatchee, FL 33470 | $26,230 |
| 9 | A Duda & Sons Inc | Oviedo, FL 32762 | $16,666 |
| 10 | Orsenigo Farms Inc | Belle Glade, FL 33430 | $12,867 |
| 11 | Bela Malacsina | Sebring, FL 33875 | $9,829 |
| 12 | Charles Thomas Charnock | West Palm Beach, FL 33401 | $8,847 |
| 13 | Joseph Redensky | Boca Raton, FL 33498 | $8,076 |
| 14 | David Rukin | West Palm Beach, FL 33407 | $5,243 |
| 15 | R Scott Spiro | Royal Palm Beach, FL 33411 | $3,346 |
| 16 | Moc Apiaries Inc | Royal Palm Beach, FL 33411 | $2,420 |
| 17 | Roy Van Husen | Boynton Beach, FL 33435 | $1,623 |
| 18 | Growers Management Inc | Belle Glade, FL 33430 | $544 |
| 19 | Jack C Rollins | Boca Raton, FL 33486 | $317 |
| 20 | W E Schlechter & Sons Inc | Belle Glade, FL 33430 | $-10,062 |
* 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