Loan Deficiency in Hettinger County, North Dakota, 1995-2023
Subsidy Recipients 101 to 120 of 707
Recipients of Loan Deficiency from farms in Hettinger County, North Dakota totaled $32,251,000 in from 1995-2023.
Rank | Recipient (* ownership information available) |
Location | Loan Deficiency 1995-2023 |
---|---|---|---|
101 | Troy John Kautzman | Mott, ND 58646 | $111,095 |
102 | Robert Candrian | Regent, ND 58650 | $110,666 |
103 | Fred Senn Jr | Mott, ND 58646 | $110,472 |
104 | Curtis Honeyman | Regent, ND 58650 | $110,279 |
105 | Lon Dell Eisenbarth | Spearfish, SD 57783 | $109,784 |
106 | Dale Mark Meier | Mott, ND 58646 | $109,727 |
107 | Lance David Jacobs | Regent, ND 58650 | $108,860 |
108 | Michael Allen Anderson | Regent, ND 58650 | $107,182 |
109 | Howard Clarence Steiner | Mott, ND 58646 | $106,661 |
110 | Dennis Peter Wax | Regent, ND 58650 | $106,287 |
111 | Dale John Wegh | Mott, ND 58646 | $105,575 |
112 | Robert Joseph Wax | Regent, ND 58650 | $105,557 |
113 | Jonathan Chris Wert | New England, ND 58647 | $103,687 |
114 | Sheri Ann Wert | New England, ND 58647 | $103,687 |
115 | Marvin Dale Jorstad | Regent, ND 58650 | $102,711 |
116 | Bruce A Ivey And Dixie Ivey Family Trust | Washougal, WA 98671 | $101,649 |
117 | Dean-dean R.& Barbar Kelsch | Mott, ND 58646 | $98,748 |
118 | James G Thomas | Mott, ND 58646 | $98,603 |
119 | Gerald Stagl Est | New England, ND 58647 | $98,373 |
120 | Dennis John Wegh | Regent, ND 58650 | $97,600 |
* 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.”