Biomass Crop Assistance Program in South Carolina, 1995-2023

Subsidy Recipients 1 to 20 of 107

Recipients of Biomass Crop Assistance Program from farms in South Carolina totaled $15,679,000 in from 1995-2023.

Rank Recipient
(* ownership information available)
Location Biomass Crop Assistance Program
1995-2023
1Canal Wood LLCConway, SC 29528$1,568,640
2White Wood IncWalterboro, SC 29488$957,466
3Collum Sawmill LLCAllendale, SC 29810$953,883
4W K Brown Timber CorporationHodges, SC 29653$796,742
5Palmetto Pulpwood & TimberFlorence, SC 29506$653,774
6Claybourn Walters Logging Co IncProctorville, NC 28375$535,507
7Coastline Forest Products IncHarleyville, SC 29448$525,414
8Tidewater Land & Timber Inc Of ScRuffin, SC 29475$443,084
9Kingstree Forest Products IncKingstree, SC 29556$391,847
10Elliott Saw Milling Co IncEstill, SC 29918$370,960
11Log Creek Timber CoEdgefield, SC 29824$351,033
12Low Country Forest Products IncGeorgetown, SC 29440$349,933
13Dempsey Wood ProductsRowesville, SC 29133$286,514
14Charles K Doolittle IncNewberry, SC 29108$281,064
15H & H Construction & Storm Services, Inc.Florence, SC 29505$262,642
16E D Pew Timber Co IncDarlington, SC 29540$258,204
17Swamp Fox Timber Co IncMarion, SC 29571$232,358
18Johnson Co IncSumter, SC 29151$232,073
19Charles Ingram Lumber CoEffingham, SC 29541$230,473
20Foothills Forest Products IncWhitmire, SC 29178$223,460

* 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.”

Next >>

 

Farm Subsidies Education

AgMag