Loan Deficiency in Hoke County, North Carolina, 1995-2023
Subsidy Recipients 21 to 40 of 108
Recipients of Loan Deficiency from farms in Hoke County, North Carolina totaled $4,932,000 in from 1995-2023.
Rank | Recipient (* ownership information available) |
Location | Loan Deficiency 1995-2023 |
---|---|---|---|
21 | W D Mcphaul | Red Springs, NC 28377 | $82,649 |
22 | James W Mcgougan | Lumber Bridge, NC 28357 | $76,172 |
23 | John W Buie | Red Springs, NC 28377 | $56,906 |
24 | John E Mcgougan Est | Raleigh, NC 27615 | $53,674 |
25 | Danny Walters | Raeford, NC 28376 | $49,006 |
26 | Monroe Farms | Raeford, NC 28376 | $42,866 |
27 | Jeffrey R Hendrix | Raeford, NC 28376 | $39,740 |
28 | Rockdale Farms Inc | Laurel Hill, NC 28351 | $39,287 |
29 | Z V Pate Inc | Laurel Hill, NC 28351 | $34,941 |
30 | William R Currie | Red Springs, NC 28377 | $34,726 |
31 | James R King Jr | Fayetteville, NC 28304 | $33,322 |
32 | Edgar M Baker | Raeford, NC 28376 | $32,796 |
33 | J D Mcleod Farm | Raeford, NC 28376 | $31,491 |
34 | Louise R Love | Raeford, NC 28376 | $31,445 |
35 | John D Mcbryde | Shannon, NC 28386 | $30,446 |
36 | J L Mcneill Family Farm | Southern Pines, NC 28387 | $26,977 |
37 | John Elbert Forbis | Lumber Bridge, NC 28357 | $23,810 |
38 | J M King | Aberdeen, NC 28315 | $22,854 |
39 | Samuel T Smith | Wagram, NC 28396 | $22,811 |
40 | Hosea Baldwin | Lumber Bridge, NC 28357 | $21,907 |
* 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.”