Total Commodity Programs in Chouteau County, Montana, 1995-2023
Subsidy Recipients 61 to 80 of 2,890
Recipients of Total Commodity Programs from farms in Chouteau County, Montana totaled $438,013,000 in from 1995-2023.
Rank | Recipient (* ownership information available) |
Location | Total Commodity Programs 1995-2023 |
---|---|---|---|
61 | D & J Robertson Farms Inc | Loma, MT 59460 | $1,271,823 |
62 | R T D Farm Inc | Fort Benton, MT 59442 | $1,271,526 |
63 | Dan Works Farms Inc | Loma, MT 59460 | $1,269,400 |
64 | Engellant Ranch Partnership | Geraldine, MT 59446 | $1,259,169 |
65 | David W Robinson | Great Falls, MT 59404 | $1,255,742 |
66 | F J Haxton Inc | Great Falls, MT 59404 | $1,255,446 |
67 | D J M Farms Inc | Fort Benton, MT 59442 | $1,251,592 |
68 | Charlson Ranch Co | Carter, MT 59420 | $1,242,147 |
69 | Benjamin Ranch | Fort Benton, MT 59442 | $1,241,093 |
70 | Bessette Ranch Co | Loma, MT 59460 | $1,237,953 |
71 | Drylander Farming | Brady, MT 59416 | $1,235,946 |
72 | Triple E Inc | Big Sandy, MT 59520 | $1,228,305 |
73 | Andreasen Lenington Partnership | Fort Benton, MT 59442 | $1,226,321 |
74 | Duane Beirwagen Farms Inc | Loma, MT 59460 | $1,224,949 |
75 | Lefurgey Farms Inc | Loma, MT 59460 | $1,202,769 |
76 | Walker Co Inc | Floweree, MT 59440 | $1,185,241 |
77 | C D Farms Inc | Loma, MT 59460 | $1,179,826 |
78 | Whitehorn Farms Inc | Floweree, MT 59440 | $1,171,839 |
79 | Stone Farms Ltd | Geraldine, MT 59446 | $1,166,625 |
80 | Killion Farms Inc | Great Falls, MT 59404 | $1,162,554 |
* 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.”