County Hotspots: Where Farm Subsidies Concentrate
Farm subsidy dollars don't spread evenly across America's 3,000+ counties. A handful of agricultural powerhouses collect outsized shares.
Key Finding
Tulare County, California alone received $806.6M — more than 26 entire states. The top 20 counties account for $7.43B (5.1% of all county payments).
The Top 20 Counties
| # | County | State | Total | Payments |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Tulare | California | $806.6M | 27,777 |
| 2 | Fresno | California | $652.2M | 22,175 |
| 3 | Gaines | Texas | $448.2M | 44,946 |
| 4 | Merced | California | $432.1M | 20,388 |
| 5 | Stanislaus | California | $394.1M | 19,733 |
| 6 | San Joaquin | California | $385.2M | 16,403 |
| 7 | Kern | California | $377.4M | 10,301 |
| 8 | District of Columbia | Florida | $375.0M | 91 |
| 9 | Whitman | Washington | $325.0M | 61,856 |
| 10 | Brown | South Dakota | $320.3M | 41,835 |
| 11 | Hale | Texas | $310.1M | 56,799 |
| 12 | Cavalier | North Dakota | $304.5M | 33,540 |
| 13 | Kings | California | $303.4M | 11,485 |
| 14 | Sioux | Iowa | $298.8M | 36,560 |
| 15 | Stutsman | North Dakota | $295.1M | 36,797 |
| 16 | Terry | Texas | $293.9M | 42,550 |
| 17 | Lamb | Texas | $285.2M | 52,813 |
| 18 | Dawson | Texas | $284.4M | 44,910 |
| 19 | Grant | Washington | $273.2M | 21,598 |
| 20 | Kossuth | Iowa | $270.4M | 49,336 |
Counties vs. States
The geographic concentration is striking. Tulare County (California) with $806.6M in total payments exceeds the entire state totals of 26 states. This happens because subsidy-heavy counties tend to be in the agricultural heartland — the Great Plains, Central Valley of California, and the Mississippi Delta — where large-scale commodity farming dominates.
What Drives Concentration?
Several factors create county hotspots: soil quality and climate suited for commodity crops, large average farm sizes, historical enrollment in conservation programs, and proximity to disaster-prone regions. Counties in Texas and the southern Plains benefit disproportionately from livestock disaster programs, while Corn Belt counties dominate commodity payments.
The Rural Paradox
Despite billions flowing to these counties, many remain economically challenged. Farm subsidies tend to capitalize into land values rather than raising local incomes — meaning the money benefits landowners (who may live elsewhere) more than the communities themselves. This is the central paradox of place-based farm spending.
📊 Data Sources
USDA Farm Service Agency payment data (1995–2024). County-level aggregations from FSA payment files. Explore all counties on the Counties page.