Farm Subsidy information
Cass County, Michigan
Total Subsidies in Cass County, Michigan, 1995-2023
Subsidy Recipients 61 to 80 of 1,798
Recipients of Total Subsidies from farms in Cass County, Michigan totaled $174,570,000 in from 1995-2023.
Rank | Recipient (* ownership information available) |
Location | Total Subsidies 1995-2023 |
---|---|---|---|
61 | David Harold Leach | Cassopolis, MI 49031 | $564,253 |
62 | Lois Stamp | Vandalia, MI 49095 | $561,713 |
63 | Sparks Cedarlee Farm | Cassopolis, MI 49031 | $559,707 |
64 | Gary Lee King | White Pigeon, MI 49099 | $555,763 |
65 | Navajo Mesa Farms LLC | Three Rivers, MI 49093 | $550,825 |
66 | Brookside Farm LLC | Dowagiac, MI 49047 | $542,559 |
67 | Manning Farms | Vandalia, MI 49095 | $533,263 |
68 | Seldom Rest Agri Enterprises LLC | Niles, MI 49120 | $529,050 |
69 | Jacob Smith | Cassopolis, MI 49031 | $525,860 |
70 | Maple Grove Farm LLC | Cassopolis, MI 49031 | $515,019 |
71 | R James Guse Sr | Cassopolis, MI 49031 | $512,270 |
72 | Darryl Lee Swartz | Marcellus, MI 49067 | $507,406 |
73 | Terance Alan Davis | White Pigeon, MI 49099 | $504,537 |
74 | Pace Family Farms | Schoolcraft, MI 49087 | $501,128 |
75 | Joseph Young Sr | Vandalia, MI 49095 | $495,267 |
76 | Overtime Farms LLC | Marcellus, MI 49067 | $495,119 |
77 | Richard Lee Swartz | Marcellus, MI 49067 | $490,506 |
78 | Sunny Brooke Growers | Berrien Springs, MI 49103 | $475,325 |
79 | Randall Lee Burger | Niles, MI 49120 | $461,906 |
80 | David C Reed | Cassopolis, MI 49031 | $457,103 |
* 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.”