Direct Payment Program in Hettinger County, North Dakota, 1995-2023
Subsidy Recipients 61 to 80 of 973
Recipients of Direct Payment Program from farms in Hettinger County, North Dakota totaled $47,006,000 in from 1995-2023.
Rank | Recipient (* ownership information available) |
Location | Direct Payment Program 1995-2023 |
---|---|---|---|
61 | James Alan Butler | Mott, ND 58646 | $237,111 |
62 | Constance Joy Jalbert | Reeder, ND 58649 | $236,310 |
63 | Brian Allen Jung | New England, ND 58647 | $235,177 |
64 | Alan Herner | Mott, ND 58646 | $233,036 |
65 | Marvin Dale Jorstad | Regent, ND 58650 | $231,688 |
66 | Kelly Herberholz | New England, ND 58647 | $227,757 |
67 | Delmar Schaible/delmar D Schaible | Mott, ND 58646 | $227,694 |
68 | Terry Lynn Laufer | Mott, ND 58646 | $227,125 |
69 | Gary Leroy Butler | Mott, ND 58646 | $226,053 |
70 | Terry Kirschemann | Regent, ND 58650 | $221,190 |
71 | Allan Joseph Kohl | New England, ND 58647 | $217,270 |
72 | Bryan David Jirges | New England, ND 58647 | $214,849 |
73 | Cyrus E Hartman | Regent, ND 58650 | $213,300 |
74 | Darrel Jay Ottmar | Mott, ND 58646 | $212,072 |
75 | Daxon A Kirschemann | Mott, ND 58646 | $209,916 |
76 | Dion Dale Ottmar | Mott, ND 58646 | $209,496 |
77 | Jonathan Chris Wert | New England, ND 58647 | $209,255 |
78 | Sheri Ann Wert | New England, ND 58647 | $209,254 |
79 | Anderson Farms Lllp | Regent, ND 58650 | $208,653 |
80 | Lon Dell Eisenbarth | Spearfish, SD 57783 | $203,817 |
* 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.”