Loan Deficiency in Waseca County, Minnesota, 1995-2023
Subsidy Recipients 101 to 120 of 816
Recipients of Loan Deficiency from farms in Waseca County, Minnesota totaled $31,709,000 in from 1995-2023.
Rank | Recipient (* ownership information available) |
Location | Loan Deficiency 1995-2023 |
---|---|---|---|
101 | Carl Walter Guse | Janesville, MN 56048 | $93,630 |
102 | Michael Joseph Mulcahey | Waseca, MN 56093 | $90,479 |
103 | Alan Flemming | Waldorf, MN 56091 | $89,706 |
104 | Darrel Flemming | Janesville, MN 56048 | $89,632 |
105 | Duane Flemming | Waseca, MN 56093 | $89,540 |
106 | Ivan Francis Maas | Janesville, MN 56048 | $89,023 |
107 | Harlin Scott Klimmek | New Richland, MN 56072 | $88,112 |
108 | David Arnold Routh | New Richland, MN 56072 | $87,846 |
109 | Jon Michael Schuch | Janesville, MN 56048 | $87,683 |
110 | Richard Paul Klimmek | New Richland, MN 56072 | $87,642 |
111 | Duwayne Cletus Hoehn | Waseca, MN 56093 | $87,423 |
112 | Lyle Leroy Kuhns | Waseca, MN 56093 | $87,083 |
113 | Richard Joseph Androli | Janesville, MN 56048 | $86,145 |
114 | Gerald Francis Holmes | Janesville, MN 56048 | $85,998 |
115 | Wayne Lester Trahms | Pemberton, MN 56078 | $84,650 |
116 | Gerald J Stencel | Waseca, MN 56093 | $84,565 |
117 | Jeffrey Dale Huelsnitz | Waseca, MN 56093 | $83,980 |
118 | Geraldine Ann Schweim | Madison Lake, MN 56063 | $83,546 |
119 | George W Byron | New Richland, MN 56072 | $83,530 |
120 | Loren Leslie Schoenrock | New Richland, MN 56072 | $83,310 |
* 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.”