Farm Subsidy information
Whitley County, Indiana
Total Subsidies in Whitley County, Indiana, 2022
Subsidy Recipients 21 to 40 of 266
Recipients of Total Subsidies from farms in Whitley County, Indiana totaled $5,542,000 in in 2022.
Rank | Recipient (* ownership information available) |
Location | Total Subsidies 2022 |
---|---|---|---|
21 | Larry E Ashbaugh | Columbia City, IN 46725 | $13,608 |
22 | J & C Nicodemus Family Farms LLC | Churubusco, IN 46723 | $11,649 |
23 | South View Farms Inc | Claypool, IN 46510 | $10,789 |
24 | Michael W Mccoy | Columbia City, IN 46725 | $10,452 |
25 | Adam Geiger | Columbia City, IN 46725 | $10,093 |
26 | Terry L Johnson | Churubusco, IN 46723 | $9,698 |
27 | , | $9,377 | |
28 | Anderson Partnership | Churubusco, IN 46723 | $8,527 |
29 | Daniel A Rowland | South Whitley, IN 46787 | $8,195 |
30 | Julia A Robinson | South Whitley, IN 46787 | $8,093 |
31 | Alisha D Bauer | Columbia City, IN 46725 | $8,061 |
32 | Scott Werstler | Larwill, IN 46764 | $8,002 |
33 | Stephen A Moore | Columbia City, IN 46725 | $7,788 |
34 | David R Brelage | Fort Wayne, IN 46818 | $7,786 |
35 | Tim Fries | Columbia City, IN 46725 | $7,727 |
36 | Joseph Edgar Anderson | Larwill, IN 46764 | $7,565 |
37 | Brian L Michel | South Whitley, IN 46787 | $7,523 |
38 | Randall K Studebaker | South Whitley, IN 46787 | $7,327 |
39 | Kenneth L Laux | Columbia City, IN 46725 | $6,721 |
40 | Danny Studebaker | South Whitley, IN 46787 | $6,050 |
* 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.”