Farm Subsidy information
Kingsbury County, South Dakota
Total Subsidies in Kingsbury County, South Dakota, 2019
Subsidy Recipients 41 to 60 of 671
Recipients of Total Subsidies from farms in Kingsbury County, South Dakota totaled $24,346,000 in in 2019.
| Rank | Recipient (* ownership information available) |
Location | Total Subsidies 2019 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 41 | Debra D Coughlin | Iroquois, SD 57353 | $76,097 |
| 42 | Michael Tolzin | Lake Preston, SD 57249 | $75,587 |
| 43 | Redstone Farms Inc | Huron, SD 57350 | $74,433 |
| 44 | Kingsbury Hutterian Brethren Inc. | Willow Lake, SD 57278 | $73,954 |
| 45 | Dean Marvin Tolzin | Lake Preston, SD 57249 | $73,493 |
| 46 | Catherine Nelson | Lake Preston, SD 57249 | $72,466 |
| 47 | Jon Nelson | Lake Preston, SD 57249 | $72,466 |
| 48 | William Lee Rydbom | De Smet, SD 57231 | $72,226 |
| 49 | Bryson Ensz | Bancroft, SD 57353 | $71,472 |
| 50 | Keith Larson | De Smet, SD 57231 | $70,529 |
| 51 | Pleasant Hill Farm | Bancroft, SD 57353 | $69,847 |
| 52 | Rhona Leigh Albrecht | Howard, SD 57349 | $67,900 |
| 53 | Alan Dean Boyd | Oldham, SD 57051 | $67,808 |
| 54 | Bonita Marie Albrecht | De Smet, SD 57231 | $67,411 |
| 55 | Susanne Marie Albrecht | Arlington, SD 57212 | $67,411 |
| 56 | Tamara Rae Albrecht | De Smet, SD 57231 | $67,411 |
| 57 | Mark Ely Johnson | De Smet, SD 57231 | $67,118 |
| 58 | Allan Rieck | Lake Preston, SD 57249 | $67,010 |
| 59 | Raymond Kerr | Lake Preston, SD 57249 | $65,970 |
| 60 | David Joel Duffy | Oldham, SD 57051 | $65,499 |
* 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.”
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