Farm Subsidy information
Starr County, Texas
Total Subsidies in Starr County, Texas, 2023
Subsidy Recipients 81 to 100 of 425
Recipients of Total Subsidies from farms in Starr County, Texas totaled $5,908,000 in in 2023.
Rank | Recipient (* ownership information available) |
Location | Total Subsidies 2023 |
---|---|---|---|
81 | Miguel A Martinez | Mcallen, TX 78503 | $6,778 |
82 | Triple A Ranch | Rio Grande City, TX 78582 | $6,766 |
83 | Thalia H Munoz | Roma, TX 78584 | $6,629 |
84 | Guadalupe Perez Saenz | Santa Elena, TX 78591 | $6,540 |
85 | Maria E Trevino | Rio Grande City, TX 78582 | $6,427 |
86 | Eduardo R Izaguirre Jr | Spring Branch, TX 78070 | $6,401 |
87 | Laura N Salinas | San Juan, TX 78589 | $6,401 |
88 | Michael B Requenez | Mission, TX 78572 | $6,323 |
89 | Maria Oralia Garza | Rio Grande City, TX 78582 | $6,316 |
90 | Everardo Garcia Jr | Roma, TX 78584 | $6,159 |
91 | Derly F Guerra | Mission, TX 78572 | $6,102 |
92 | Luis Mario Villarreal | Rio Grande City, TX 78582 | $6,080 |
93 | Marcelo Alaniz | Santa Elena, TX 78591 | $6,056 |
94 | Noel Arturo Zamora | Sullivan City, TX 78595 | $6,033 |
95 | , | $5,956 | |
96 | Margarito Bermudez | Rio Grande City, TX 78582 | $5,910 |
97 | Jose Luis Garza | Rio Grande City, TX 78582 | $5,816 |
98 | Eloy Zarate Jr | Rio Grande City, TX 78582 | $5,792 |
99 | Colleen I Martinez | Mission, TX 78574 | $5,786 |
100 | David E Guerrero | Rio Grande City, TX 78582 | $5,780 |
* 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.”