Counter Cyclical Program in Harford County, Maryland, 1995-2023
Subsidy Recipients 1 to 20 of 131
Recipients of Counter Cyclical Program from farms in Harford County, Maryland totaled $1,055,000 in from 1995-2023.
Rank | Recipient (* ownership information available) |
Location | Counter Cyclical Program 1995-2023 |
---|---|---|---|
1 | Grimmel Farms Ptr | Jarrettsville, MD 21084 | $105,708 |
2 | Martin Brothers Ptr | Pylesville, MD 21132 | $74,419 |
3 | Thomas Adams III | Bel Air, MD 21015 | $54,105 |
4 | Stephen T Pieper | White Hall, MD 21161 | $48,490 |
5 | Parlett Brothers Ptr | Baltimore, MD 21220 | $45,724 |
6 | Ma & Pa Farms LLC | Pylesville, MD 21132 | $29,672 |
7 | William Thomas Moore Jr | Churchville, MD 21028 | $29,280 |
8 | Troyer Farms Jv | Jarrettsville, MD 21084 | $29,262 |
9 | Holloway Brothers Ptr | Darlington, MD 21034 | $26,384 |
10 | Roy L Testerman | Pylesville, MD 21132 | $22,510 |
11 | Clear Meadow Farm Ptr | White Hall, MD 21161 | $20,676 |
12 | Geraldine Miller Estate | Darlington, MD 21034 | $17,738 |
13 | B G S Jourdan & Sons Ptr | Darlington, MD 21034 | $17,644 |
14 | Rutledge Brick House Farm Inc | Jarrettsville, MD 21084 | $16,862 |
15 | Dougherty Bros | Pylesville, MD 21132 | $16,784 |
16 | William C Wernig | Street, MD 21154 | $15,997 |
17 | John A Rigdon | Jarrettsville, MD 21084 | $15,671 |
18 | Woodbine Farms Inc | Airville, PA 17302 | $14,763 |
19 | Carl William Nash Jr | Street, MD 21154 | $14,587 |
20 | James H Archer Jr | Pylesville, MD 21132 | $14,441 |
* 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 >>