Loan Deficiency in Geary County, Kansas, 1995-2023
Subsidy Recipients 61 to 80 of 430
Recipients of Loan Deficiency from farms in Geary County, Kansas totaled $3,654,000 in from 1995-2023.
Rank | Recipient (* ownership information available) |
Location | Loan Deficiency 1995-2023 |
---|---|---|---|
61 | Robert Goss | Dwight, KS 66849 | $15,023 |
62 | Daniel P Boller | Junction City, KS 66441 | $14,882 |
63 | Bar-box Ranch Inc | Alta Vista, KS 66834 | $14,452 |
64 | Jack L Swenson | Junction City, KS 66441 | $14,218 |
65 | E A Schellhorn | White City, KS 66872 | $14,024 |
66 | Patrick A Beavers | Junction City, KS 66441 | $13,053 |
67 | The Gladys M Dietrich Trust | Manhattan, KS 66502 | $12,817 |
68 | Richard L Gustafson | Junction City, KS 66441 | $12,442 |
69 | Roland L Glessner | Junction City, KS 66441 | $12,221 |
70 | Stanley Ascher Trust | Alta Vista, KS 66834 | $11,776 |
71 | James J Waters | Manhattan, KS 66502 | $11,506 |
72 | Phillip C Boller | Junction City, KS 66441 | $11,446 |
73 | Wayne A Adams | Junction City, KS 66441 | $11,093 |
74 | Ronald H And Marsha Linn Wiegert | Manhattan, KS 66502 | $11,077 |
75 | Charles W And Virginia R Gfeller Rev Trust | Junction City, KS 66441 | $10,815 |
76 | Samuel R Jahnke | Junction City, KS 66441 | $10,213 |
77 | Jason W Swenson | Junction City, KS 66441 | $10,045 |
78 | Phyllis Kotoyantz | Junction City, KS 66441 | $9,767 |
79 | James- James And Shi L Ferguson | Junction City, KS 66441 | $9,709 |
80 | William J Taylor | Junction City, KS 66441 | $9,594 |
* 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.”