Cotton Ginning Program in 7th District of South Carolina (Rep. Tim Rice), 1995-2023
Subsidy Recipients 61 to 80 of 101
Recipients of Cotton Ginning Program from farms in 7th District of South Carolina (Rep. Tim Rice) totaled $1,823,000 in from 1995-2023.
Rank | Recipient (* ownership information available) |
Location | Cotton Ginning Program 1995-2023 |
---|---|---|---|
61 | Kevin D Clemons | Green Sea, SC 29545 | $3,456 |
62 | Matthew S Willoughby | Nichols, SC 29581 | $3,290 |
63 | John W Oneal | Blenheim, SC 29516 | $3,211 |
64 | Samuel L Anderson | Nichols, SC 29581 | $2,192 |
65 | R Mcniel Hinson | Hamer, SC 29547 | $2,051 |
66 | Jamie E Smith | Mount Pleasant, SC 29464 | $1,775 |
67 | Lila Stanton Mccoll Jr Estate | Little Rock, SC 29567 | $1,465 |
68 | James C Taylor | Gresham, SC 29546 | $1,398 |
69 | Wade M Taylor | Gresham, SC 29546 | $1,398 |
70 | Sue C Davis | Greensboro, NC 27403 | $1,048 |
71 | Grassy Bay Farms Inc | Green Sea, SC 29545 | $812 |
72 | Edward M Heustess | Clio, SC 29525 | $806 |
73 | Thomas Neil Mcrimmon | Little Rock, SC 29567 | $796 |
74 | J Lynn Mccoll | Clio, SC 29525 | $788 |
75 | F G Smith | Mount Pleasant, SC 29464 | $695 |
76 | John D Coleman III | Florence, SC 29501 | $628 |
77 | Charles H Vitou Jr | Burlington, NC 27215 | $567 |
78 | Alex M Cottingham And Elizabeth A | Clio, SC 29525 | $560 |
79 | Robert A Newton | Clio, SC 29525 | $476 |
80 | Jimmy L Mccoll | Clio, SC 29525 | $469 |
* 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.”