Average Crop Revenue Election Program (ACRE) in Auglaize County, Ohio, 1995-2023
Subsidy Recipients 81 to 100 of 111
Recipients of Average Crop Revenue Election Program (ACRE) from farms in Auglaize County, Ohio totaled $1,654,000 in from 1995-2023.
Rank | Recipient (* ownership information available) |
Location | Average Crop Revenue Election Program (ACRE) 1995-2023 |
---|---|---|---|
81 | Nancy Dardio | Wapakoneta, OH 45895 | $1,615 |
82 | Paul E Steva | Saint Marys, OH 45885 | $1,544 |
83 | Zita Ruhe | Ottawa, OH 45875 | $1,520 |
84 | Inlimine Llp | New Knoxville, OH 45871 | $1,322 |
85 | Anthony M Torsell | Saint Marys, OH 45885 | $1,263 |
86 | Jeffrey James Riethman | New Bremen, OH 45869 | $1,213 |
87 | Robert E Miller Farms Inc | Elida, OH 45807 | $1,146 |
88 | G & A Miller Farms Inc | Elida, OH 45807 | $1,140 |
89 | William F Strohm | Wapakoneta, OH 45895 | $1,081 |
90 | Ned L Andrews | Waynesfield, OH 45896 | $1,081 |
91 | Melvin Mcdermitt | Saint Marys, OH 45885 | $926 |
92 | Margaret Yahl | Saint Marys, OH 45885 | $849 |
93 | Cynthia K Lepley Family Revocable | Wapakoneta, OH 45895 | $826 |
94 | Jeremy W Heitz | Wapakoneta, OH 45895 | $752 |
95 | John Heitkamp | New Bremen, OH 45869 | $613 |
96 | Ruby M Greiwe | New Bremen, OH 45869 | $605 |
97 | Delbert G Greiwe Revocable Trust | New Bremen, OH 45869 | $605 |
98 | Matthew Knatz | Saint Marys, OH 45885 | $534 |
99 | Crusie Andrews | Lima, OH 45804 | $532 |
100 | Gary Barnes | Lakeview, OH 43331 | $422 |
* 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.”