By Audrey Jackson
Reuter’s Tom Polansek reported that, “the U.S. Department of Agriculture dramatically lowered ?its reported beef export sales on Thursday, sparking fresh concerns about the quality of the agency’s data after staffing losses as part of the Trump administration’s reshaping of the federal government.”
AgroLatam’s Marco Díaz Collins reported that, “the revised report showed that exporters sold a net 12,064 metric tons of U.S. beef during the week ending June 25, compared with the 126,062 metric tons initially reported on July 2. The original figures suggested a nearly 500% week-over-week surge in beef sales, an increase that many market participants considered unrealistic given current supply conditions.”
“Analysts pointed out that several importing countries were listed as purchasing volumes far beyond their historical buying patterns, raising immediate questions about whether the numbers accurately reflected market activity before the USDA acknowledged the reporting error,” Collins reported.
RFD-TV’s Tony St. James reported that, “the adjustment included previous entries tied to Chile, Italy, Japan, Hong Kong, and several other markets.”
“After the correction, weekly beef activity returned closer to normal levels,” James reported. “The latest report showed sales of 14,000 metric tons and exports of 14,500 metric tons, led by traditional buyers including Japan, South Korea, Mexico, Taiwan, and Canada.”
Trust in USDA Reports Wavers
Rural Radio Network reported that, “the revision comes as the U.S. cattle industry faces some of its tightest supplies in decades. Record-high beef prices, strong consumer demand and reduced cattle numbers have increased attention on every market signal, including USDA export reports that producers, exporters and traders use to make business decisions.”
“Trust in USDA reports has suffered among traders, analysts and farmers following deep staff losses and after the agency significantly underestimated corn acres last year,” Polansek reported. “USDA ?also delayed a quarterly agricultural trade report and excluded findings that pointed to tariffs as a reason for a forecast increase in the agricultural trade deficit, ?which analysts said raised questions about its objectivity.”
Source : illinois.edu