Loan Deficiency in Somerset County, Maryland, 1995-2021
Subsidy Recipients 1 to 20 of 161
Recipients of Loan Deficiency from farms in Somerset County, Maryland totaled $5,791,000 in from 1995-2021.
Rank | Recipient (* ownership information available) |
Location | Loan Deficiency 1995-2021 |
---|---|---|---|
1 | Swift Farms Inc | Marion Station, MD 21838 | $337,936 |
2 | Steven Michael Cullen | Crisfield, MD 21817 | $305,995 |
3 | Dakota Farms Inc | Princess Anne, MD 21853 | $280,167 |
4 | Brittingham Brothers | Marion Station, MD 21838 | $265,938 |
5 | Wimberly Farms Inc | Princess Anne, MD 21853 | $217,052 |
6 | James Nelson Farms Inc | Westover, MD 21871 | $193,048 |
7 | T & J Farms | Marion Station, MD 21838 | $177,898 |
8 | Pine Land Farms | Marion Station, MD 21838 | $162,475 |
9 | Overholt Farms | Pocomoke City, MD 21851 | $134,385 |
10 | Michael S. King Sr | Princess Anne, MD 21853 | $115,179 |
11 | Miller Farms | Princess Anne, MD 21853 | $114,666 |
12 | Marshall's Seafood & Farming | Marion Station, MD 21838 | $106,729 |
13 | Thomas William Pinto | Princess Anne, MD 21853 | $103,381 |
14 | Nelson Farms | Westover, MD 21871 | $101,417 |
15 | Lawrence C Thomas Inc | Princess Anne, MD 21853 | $94,726 |
16 | Robert N Shockley | Princess Anne, MD 21853 | $93,668 |
17 | Rantz William Purcell | Princess Anne, MD 21853 | $90,008 |
18 | A J King | Westover, MD 21871 | $88,019 |
19 | James B. Beauchamp, Sr. | Pocomoke City, MD 21851 | $86,937 |
20 | William Anderson | Princess Anne, MD 21853 | $84,654 |
* 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 >>