Counter Cyclical Program in Davison County, South Dakota, 1995-2023
Subsidy Recipients 101 to 120 of 564
Recipients of Counter Cyclical Program from farms in Davison County, South Dakota totaled $3,831,000 in from 1995-2023.
Rank | Recipient (* ownership information available) |
Location | Counter Cyclical Program 1995-2023 |
---|---|---|---|
101 | Robert W Greenway | Mitchell, SD 57301 | $12,240 |
102 | Jeff P Vermeulen | Letcher, SD 57359 | $11,943 |
103 | Wade Robert Strand | Mitchell, SD 57301 | $11,936 |
104 | Thomas Jason Bialas | Dimock, SD 57331 | $11,551 |
105 | Steve J Weber | Dimock, SD 57331 | $11,534 |
106 | Richard Lee Wadleigh | Mount Vernon, SD 57363 | $11,496 |
107 | Scott Suelflow | Mitchell, SD 57301 | $11,482 |
108 | Larry A Hasz | Mitchell, SD 57301 | $11,439 |
109 | Tom Suhr | Dimock, SD 57331 | $11,269 |
110 | Ronald R Baker | Mount Vernon, SD 57363 | $11,263 |
111 | Larry Neugebauer | Ethan, SD 57334 | $11,014 |
112 | Shannon Gustave Klumb | Ethan, SD 57334 | $10,757 |
113 | Klumb Farms | Mount Vernon, SD 57363 | $10,682 |
114 | Warren Eugene Kluth | Mitchell, SD 57301 | $10,550 |
115 | Dennis Michael Napolitano | Sioux Falls, SD 57110 | $10,548 |
116 | Thomas Laverne Greenway | Mitchell, SD 57301 | $10,435 |
117 | Storm Farm Inc | Mitchell, SD 57301 | $10,422 |
118 | Ryan Charles Storm | Mount Vernon, SD 57363 | $10,422 |
119 | Jared Leon Storm | Ethan, SD 57334 | $10,328 |
120 | Lincoln Jerome Neugebauer | Mitchell, SD 57301 | $10,246 |
* 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.”