Farm Subsidy information
10th District of Michigan
(Rep. Paul Mitchell)
Total Subsidies in 10th District of Michigan (Rep. Paul Mitchell), 1995-2023
Subsidy Recipients 1 to 20 of 8,602
Recipients of Total Subsidies from farms in 10th District of Michigan (Rep. Paul Mitchell) totaled $783,863,000 in from 1995-2023.
| Rank | Recipient (* ownership information available) |
Location | Total Subsidies 1995-2023 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Bischer Farms Partnership | Ruth, MI 48470 | $5,084,005 |
| 2 | Vandamme Farms Enterprise | Brown City, MI 48416 | $4,891,441 |
| 3 | Peters Brothers Farms | Riley, MI 48041 | $4,153,689 |
| 4 | Herford Brothers | Elkton, MI 48731 | $3,191,275 |
| 5 | Farm Services Agency ** | Langdon, ND 58249 | $3,025,162 |
| 6 | Palms Boys LLC | Palms, MI 48465 | $2,998,194 |
| 7 | J A D E | Pigeon, MI 48755 | $2,947,549 |
| 8 | Mc Of Mc Inc | Minden City, MI 48456 | $2,705,577 |
| 9 | Ken Miller Farms | Marlette, MI 48453 | $2,477,886 |
| 10 | John Gough Farms Inc | Deckerville, MI 48427 | $2,201,138 |
| 11 | Grout Farms Inc | Croswell, MI 48422 | $2,117,076 |
| 12 | E T L Farms Inc | Pigeon, MI 48755 | $2,091,925 |
| 13 | Stoutenburg Farms | Sandusky, MI 48471 | $2,036,810 |
| 14 | T & H Farms | Port Austin, MI 48467 | $2,015,652 |
| 15 | Kenneth Earl Landsburg | Sandusky, MI 48471 | $1,973,089 |
| 16 | Highland Dairy LLC | Sebewaing, MI 48759 | $1,969,600 |
| 17 | Wadsworth Farms Inc | Sandusky, MI 48471 | $1,969,051 |
| 18 | Dale Stamp Farms | Marlette, MI 48453 | $1,944,554 |
| 19 | Wessel Bros & Son LLC | Columbus, MI 48063 | $1,908,227 |
| 20 | Thuemmel Dairy Inc | Port Austin, MI 48467 | $1,906,107 |
* 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 >>
Increasing crop reference prices would hurt young farmers
Do billionaires get farm subsidies?
Crop insurance pays billions in weather-related losses linked to the climate crisis
Crop insurance costs soar over time, reaching a record high in 2022
As the climate emergency heats up the Southwest, crop insurance payouts for heat surge
In the intensifying climate crisis, a hotter Southwest spurs rising heat-related crop insurance costs
