Farm Subsidy information
Anoka County, Minnesota
Total Subsidies in Anoka County, Minnesota, 1995-2023
Subsidy Recipients 81 to 100 of 416
Recipients of Total Subsidies from farms in Anoka County, Minnesota totaled $21,383,000 in from 1995-2023.
Rank | Recipient (* ownership information available) |
Location | Total Subsidies 1995-2023 |
---|---|---|---|
81 | Compart's Boar Store Of Princeton Inc | Nicollet, MN 56074 | $35,547 |
82 | Gwen L Kreger | Elk River, MN 55330 | $35,010 |
83 | Orville E Bakke | Cedar, MN 55011 | $34,337 |
84 | Tony Phillip Steinke | Elk River, MN 55330 | $34,247 |
85 | Sandra M Pearson | Buffalo, MN 55313 | $33,761 |
86 | Neal Anthony Kohler | Andover, MN 55304 | $33,487 |
87 | Steven John Kohler | Wyoming, MN 55092 | $33,487 |
88 | Sanford C Broadbent | Wyoming, MN 55092 | $31,726 |
89 | Perry Coons | Anoka, MN 55303 | $31,303 |
90 | Sylvia L Marier | Hugo, MN 55038 | $30,570 |
91 | Irma May Estate | Elk River, MN 55330 | $30,535 |
92 | Charles Henry Beach | Dayton, MN 55327 | $29,766 |
93 | Raymond H Jones | Elk River, MN 55330 | $29,213 |
94 | Walls Brothers | Kamuela, HI 96743 | $28,982 |
95 | Chuck F Yang | Lino Lakes, MN 55014 | $28,889 |
96 | Roy P Anderson | Cedar, MN 55011 | $28,251 |
97 | Charles W Mickelson | Cedar, MN 55011 | $27,655 |
98 | John W Hanson | Cedar, MN 55011 | $27,591 |
99 | John F Kohler | Ham Lake, MN 55304 | $26,040 |
100 | Dominic Robert Smith | Circle Pines, MN 55014 | $25,684 |
* 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.”