Loan Deficiency in North Carolina, 1995-2021
Subsidy Recipients 1 to 20 of 19,146
Recipients of Loan Deficiency from farms in North Carolina totaled $555,027,000 in from 1995-2021.
| Rank | Recipient (* ownership information available) |
Location | Loan Deficiency 1995-2021 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Amd Farms | Hobgood, NC 27843 | $2,377,080 |
| 2 | Cox Brothers Farms | Monroe, NC 28112 | $2,214,373 |
| 3 | Howard Farms | Deep Run, NC 28525 | $1,815,178 |
| 4 | James E Jr And Wanda H Howard | Deep Run, NC 28525 | $1,635,467 |
| 5 | Fulcher Brothers Farm | Ernul, NC 28527 | $1,181,696 |
| 6 | Joe Denning & Sons | Benson, NC 27504 | $1,161,570 |
| 7 | Spring Branch Farms | New Bern, NC 28562 | $1,159,437 |
| 8 | Brown Partners | Pink Hill, NC 28572 | $1,149,413 |
| 9 | Sanderson & Son Farming | Kinston, NC 28501 | $1,065,256 |
| 10 | The Williamson Farm | Mount Gilead, NC 27306 | $1,020,336 |
| 11 | Brent Riggs Farms | Maysville, NC 28555 | $1,000,358 |
| 12 | Harvey L & Sally L Rouse | Trenton, NC 28585 | $924,803 |
| 13 | Ferebee Iv Partnership | Shawboro, NC 27973 | $896,536 |
| 14 | Lancaster Properties | Stantonsburg, NC 27883 | $893,125 |
| 15 | Edward & Kenneth Cherry | Elizabeth City, NC 27909 | $884,380 |
| 16 | Lee Jones & Jones | Arapahoe, NC 28510 | $840,841 |
| 17 | Arthur Farms LLC | New Bern, NC 28562 | $821,303 |
| 18 | T & T Farms | Leesburg, GA 31763 | $821,139 |
| 19 | Proctor Farms | Edenton, NC 27932 | $808,850 |
| 20 | Thomas E Allen & Sons LLC | Pantego, NC 27860 | $798,834 |
* 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