Market Gains in Dakota County, Nebraska, 1995-2023
Subsidy Recipients 101 to 120 of 149
Recipients of Market Gains from farms in Dakota County, Nebraska totaled $5,249,000 in from 1995-2023.
Rank | Recipient (* ownership information available) |
Location | Market Gains 1995-2023 |
---|---|---|---|
101 | Eugene Rohde | South Sioux City, NE 68776 | $4,254 |
102 | Edith Beermann | Dakota City, NE 68731 | $4,110 |
103 | Roger Beermann | Dakota City, NE 68731 | $4,110 |
104 | John F Kayl | Waterbury, NE 68785 | $4,035 |
105 | Rick Claassen | Dakota City, NE 68731 | $3,939 |
106 | Donald E Hogh | Jackson, NE 68743 | $3,873 |
107 | Thomas D Love | Jackson, NE 68743 | $3,831 |
108 | Honore M Huse | Dakota City, NE 68731 | $3,430 |
109 | James E Swanson Sr | Homer, NE 68030 | $3,301 |
110 | Douglas A Huggenberger | Emerson, NE 68733 | $2,800 |
111 | Allen Heikes | Dakota City, NE 68731 | $2,721 |
112 | Beermann Reed Inc | Dakota City, NE 68731 | $2,536 |
113 | Dick H Heikes Trust | Dakota City, NE 68731 | $2,277 |
114 | John J Huse | North Sioux City, SD 57049 | $2,215 |
115 | Stanley C Binkley | Hubbard, NE 68741 | $2,172 |
116 | William F Haafke | Dakota City, NE 68731 | $2,158 |
117 | Alfred Jensen | Jackson, NE 68743 | $2,038 |
118 | Paul H High | Hubbard, NE 68741 | $2,028 |
119 | Ronald Messerschmidt | Waterbury, NE 68785 | $2,024 |
120 | Jerold E Gunsolley | South Sioux City, NE 68776 | $1,752 |
* 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.”