Farm Subsidy information
Wright County, Minnesota
Total Subsidies in Wright County, Minnesota, 1995-2021
Subsidy Recipients 1 to 20 of 2,786
Recipients of Total Subsidies from farms in Wright County, Minnesota totaled $243,999,000 in from 1995-2021.
| Rank | Recipient (* ownership information available) |
Location | Total Subsidies 1995-2021 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Woodland Dairy Inc | Plato, MN 55370 | $2,080,627 |
| 2 | Kapseg Inc | Maple Lake, MN 55358 | $2,007,036 |
| 3 | Dahlman Farms Inc | Cokato, MN 55321 | $1,805,317 |
| 4 | John R Dearing | Annandale, MN 55302 | $1,612,886 |
| 5 | Chanlore Farm Inc | Cokato, MN 55321 | $1,494,539 |
| 6 | Diers Corporation | Waverly, MN 55390 | $1,398,639 |
| 7 | Tnt Farms Inc | Cokato, MN 55321 | $1,386,937 |
| 8 | Donald L Olean | Annandale, MN 55302 | $1,298,560 |
| 9 | Mark Olean | Annandale, MN 55302 | $1,289,286 |
| 10 | Creekside Dairy | Waverly, MN 55390 | $1,177,252 |
| 11 | Wade J Hoffman | Annandale, MN 55302 | $1,152,258 |
| 12 | Wurm Farms Llp | Maple Lake, MN 55358 | $1,127,066 |
| 13 | Allan Wolff | Annandale, MN 55302 | $1,083,967 |
| 14 | Dutch Lake Dairy Inc | Howard Lake, MN 55349 | $1,083,062 |
| 15 | Loren Borg | Cedar Falls, IA 50613 | $1,074,066 |
| 16 | Forsman Farms Inc | Howard Lake, MN 55349 | $1,070,602 |
| 17 | Scott A Kohls | Delano, MN 55328 | $1,063,622 |
| 18 | Larry E Hoffman | Annandale, MN 55302 | $1,005,704 |
| 19 | John R Czanstkowski Sr | Delano, MN 55328 | $937,366 |
| 20 | George J Bakeberg | Waverly, MN 55390 | $915,333 |
* 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 >>
Federal crop insurance reform vital for incentivizing climate adaptation on farms
Farm Subsidies Ballooned Under Trump
Is Federal Crop Insurance Policy Leading to Another Dust Bowl?
Double Dipping:
The "Farm Crisis" Myth
Crying Wolf