USDA cuts beef export sales 90% after faulty data report

USDA cut its late-June beef export sales estimate to 12,064 metric tons after saying it had published incorrect data in the weekly report released a week earlier. The revised total was 90% lower than the figure USDA had initially reported for the week ended June 25, a sharp reversal that renewed questions about the agency’s reporting system and the market decisions built on it.

The original July 2 report had shown 126,062 metric tons of beef sales, nearly 500% above the prior week, a jump that many traders immediately doubted. Some of the deals were so large relative to those countries’ historical buying patterns that analysts questioned whether the numbers were plausible, even before USDA acknowledged the mistake. The agency’s weekly export-sales system covers beef and other commodities, with exporters required to report sales from Friday through Thursday by 11:59 p.m. ET the following Monday, and USDA’s Foreign Agricultural Service publishing the summary on Thursday mornings.

The error lands at a sensitive moment for a market already strained by tight cattle supplies and record beef prices. USDA’s Economic Research Service said in its June 2026 outlook that 2026 beef production was forecast at 25.438 billion pounds and that slaughter steer prices were raised to $250.16 per hundredweight. Industry data show the U.S. cattle herd remains historically low, wholesale beef prices were 19.7% higher in March 2026 than a year earlier, and further increases are expected as production stays constrained.

The reporting failure also feeds a broader credibility problem inside USDA’s statistical machinery. The Foreign Agricultural Service lost about 21% of its employees in the first half of last year, a decline that has added pressure on a system traders, exporters and ranchers rely on for timely signals. Market participants have already criticized USDA for underestimating corn acres last year, delaying a quarterly trade report and removing explanatory text that tied tariffs to a larger agricultural trade deficit. Commodity analyst Austin Schroeder put the concern bluntly: “Should the USDA have caught it? Probably.” For cattle traders, exporters and ranchers, a 90% revision is not a bookkeeping footnote. It can alter pricing assumptions, shift hedging strategies and shake confidence in the official data that helps set the tone for one of the nation’s most volatile agricultural markets.