Production Flexibility Program in Spink County, South Dakota, 1995-2023
Subsidy Recipients 1,021 to 1,040 of 1,452
Recipients of Production Flexibility Program from farms in Spink County, South Dakota totaled $39,016,000 in from 1995-2023.
Rank | Recipient (* ownership information available) |
Location | Production Flexibility Program 1995-2023 |
---|---|---|---|
1021 | Tom Boekelheide | Mellette, SD 57461 | $2,780 |
1022 | Conrad Jensen / | Conde, SD 57434 | $2,763 |
1023 | Clif Hamilton | Fargo, ND 58103 | $2,753 |
1024 | Steven Leroy Hicks | Martin, SD 57551 | $2,747 |
1025 | Luxton Farms | Ridgecrest, CA 93555 | $2,740 |
1026 | Donald E Bradley | Sioux Falls, SD 57103 | $2,738 |
1027 | Marjorie Z Goodwin / | Aberdeen, WA 98520 | $2,714 |
1028 | Elmer Kramer / | Northville, SD 57465 | $2,707 |
1029 | Paul M Opsahl | Yankton, SD 57078 | $2,696 |
1030 | Mona G Hubenthal | Palo Alto, CA 94301 | $2,695 |
1031 | John Schurch | Redfield, SD 57469 | $2,675 |
1032 | Lance Howe | Redfield, SD 57469 | $2,637 |
1033 | Hengen Julie A Living Trust | Crescent, IA 51526 | $2,635 |
1034 | Steve Woodring | Redfield, SD 57469 | $2,622 |
1035 | Richard Thelen | Redfield, SD 57469 | $2,620 |
1036 | Darwin Simmons | Frankfort, SD 57440 | $2,620 |
1037 | Marlin Simmons / | Frankfort, SD 57440 | $2,620 |
1038 | Elwood Simmons | Frankfort, SD 57440 | $2,620 |
1039 | Louis Tennis / | Conde, SD 57434 | $2,529 |
1040 | Stuart Benning | Redfield, SD 57469 | $2,512 |
* 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.”