Farm Subsidy information
Steele County, North Dakota
Total Subsidies in Steele County, North Dakota, 2021
Subsidy Recipients 121 to 140 of 562
Recipients of Total Subsidies from farms in Steele County, North Dakota totaled $31,732,000 in in 2021.
Rank | Recipient (* ownership information available) |
Location | Total Subsidies 2021 |
---|---|---|---|
121 | John Joseph Ihry | Hope, ND 58046 | $49,435 |
122 | Kurtis Dean Boe | Hatton, ND 58240 | $49,113 |
123 | Ryan Lipetzky | Hope, ND 58046 | $49,026 |
124 | Mark Howard Pedersen | Luverne, ND 58056 | $48,710 |
125 | Peter James Satrom | Galesburg, ND 58035 | $46,561 |
126 | Lonny James Vigen | Mapleton, ND 58059 | $45,973 |
127 | Brian Lee Bjerke | Clifford, ND 58016 | $45,905 |
128 | Rachael Leigh Hiam | Hope, ND 58046 | $45,684 |
129 | Brent Allen Johnson | Luverne, ND 58056 | $45,288 |
130 | Dennis Bower | Galesburg, ND 58035 | $45,283 |
131 | Scott Marius Klevberg | Northwood, ND 58267 | $45,215 |
132 | Renae Rayner | Finley, ND 58230 | $44,622 |
133 | Jeremy Carl King | Amenia, ND 58004 | $44,081 |
134 | Kevin Alexander Huschka | Hope, ND 58046 | $43,871 |
135 | Scott Pedersen | Luverne, ND 58056 | $43,654 |
136 | Daniel Opie Motter | Clifford, ND 58016 | $43,509 |
137 | Amb Brothers Farms | Portland, ND 58274 | $43,092 |
138 | Kayla Marie Satrom | Page, ND 58064 | $43,057 |
139 | Kristopher William Satrom | Page, ND 58064 | $42,728 |
140 | John David Motter | Hope, ND 58046 | $42,574 |
* 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.”