Farm Subsidy information
New Madrid County, Missouri
Total Subsidies in New Madrid County, Missouri, 2022
Subsidy Recipients 121 to 140 of 464
Recipients of Total Subsidies from farms in New Madrid County, Missouri totaled $15,759,000 in in 2022.
Rank | Recipient (* ownership information available) |
Location | Total Subsidies 2022 |
---|---|---|---|
121 | William Leslie Henry | New Madrid, MO 63869 | $6,420 |
122 | Keith Mayberry Farms | Essex, MO 63846 | $6,356 |
123 | Spencer Earl Lemings | Gideon, MO 63848 | $6,024 |
124 | Stanley Swiney | Sikeston, MO 63801 | $5,998 |
125 | Albert Riley James | New Madrid, MO 63869 | $5,918 |
126 | , | $5,874 | |
127 | Edwards Farms Inc | Bethesda, MD 20816 | $5,870 |
128 | Jacob Dean Jones | Sikeston, MO 63801 | $5,554 |
129 | Steve & Lynn Kellams Farms | Portageville, MO 63873 | $5,505 |
130 | Matilda Eftink Living Trust | Portageville, MO 63873 | $5,368 |
131 | Stokes - Pinder Farm II | Malden, MO 63863 | $5,346 |
132 | Charles William Vest Baker | Sikeston, MO 63801 | $5,007 |
133 | Mark Baker | New Madrid, MO 63869 | $4,986 |
134 | Gary Murphy Farms | Bernie, MO 63822 | $4,962 |
135 | Q M Farms Inc | Bernie, MO 63822 | $4,902 |
136 | Promise Land Farms | Paragould, AR 72450 | $4,712 |
137 | Mary E Polsgrove | Cape Girardeau, MO 63701 | $4,624 |
138 | , | $4,582 | |
139 | Lisa Jayne Sippel | New York, NY 10024 | $4,582 |
140 | Priggel Family Land LLC | Portageville, MO 63873 | $4,578 |
* 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.”