Total Commodity Programs in South Carolina, 2020
Subsidy Recipients 1 to 20 of 5,912
Recipients of Total Commodity Programs from farms in South Carolina totaled $154,487,000 in in 2020.
| Rank | Recipient (* ownership information available) |
Location | Total Commodity Programs 2020 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Arbor One Aca ** | Florence, SC 29502 | $6,574,936 |
| 2 | Ag South Farm Credit Aca ** | Douglas, GA 31534 | $3,214,812 |
| 3 | Haigler Farms Partnership | Cameron, SC 29030 | $1,835,728 |
| 4 | Prestage Farms Of Sc LLC | Camden, SC 29021 | $1,500,000 |
| 5 | Satterwhite Farms LLC | Newberry, SC 29108 | $1,333,128 |
| 6 | Farm Services Agency ** | Washington, DC 20250 | $1,216,502 |
| 7 | Lemaster Livestock Inc | Gaffney, SC 29341 | $971,595 |
| 8 | Rogers Brothers Farm | Hartsville, SC 29550 | $958,899 |
| 9 | Williams Farms Partnership | Islandton, SC 29929 | $954,805 |
| 10 | Bruce G Price & Sons | Little Rock, SC 29567 | $799,096 |
| 11 | Tolson Farms | Lynchburg, SC 29080 | $740,630 |
| 12 | Connelly Farms | Ulmer, SC 29849 | $714,655 |
| 13 | Walter P Rawl & Sons, Inc | Pelion, SC 29123 | $708,594 |
| 14 | Calhoun Farms | Clio, SC 29525 | $668,081 |
| 15 | Barnes Farm Partnership | Bishopville, SC 29010 | $639,885 |
| 16 | Boyd Farms | Rock Hill, SC 29730 | $597,374 |
| 17 | Palmetto Farms | Fort Motte, SC 29135 | $591,023 |
| 18 | Mayer Farms Inc | Newberry, SC 29108 | $579,415 |
| 19 | Coosaw Ag LLC | Fairfax, SC 29827 | $579,228 |
| 20 | Oak III Farms | Summerton, SC 29148 | $576,886 |
* 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 >>
Federal crop insurance reform vital for incentivizing climate adaptation on farms
Farm Subsidies Ballooned Under Trump
Is Federal Crop Insurance Policy Leading to Another Dust Bowl?
Double Dipping:
The "Farm Crisis" Myth
Crying Wolf