U.S. 2015 sugar carryover seen down 4%

by Ron Sterk
Share This:
Search for similar articles by keyword: [Sugar]

WASHINGTON — The U.S. Department of Agriculture in its World Agricultural Supply and Demand Estimates on July 10 forecast U.S. sugar carryover on Oct. 1, 2015, at 1,729,000 short tons, raw value, down 78,000 tons, or 4%, from 1,807,000 tons forecast in June. The carryover on Oct. 1, 2016, was projected at 1,648,000 tons, up 115,000 tons, or 7.5%, from June but down 81,000 tons, or 5%, from 2015.

The 2015-16 ending stocks-to-use ratio was projected at 13.5%, up from 12.6% projected in June and the minimum required under the suspension trade agreement between the United States and Mexico. The 2014-15 stocks-to-use ratio was forecast at 14.3%, down from 15% as the June forecast.

Reduced carryover for 2014-15 was the result of a 100,000-ton reduction in forecast imports from Mexico (at 1,426,000 tons) partially offset by a 22,000-ton increase in tariff-rate quota imports (1,608,000 tons).

Changes for 2015-16 included lower beginning stocks more than offset by a 45,000-ton increase in domestic production (at 8,765,000 tons), a 122,000-ton increase in T.R.Q. imports (at 1,491,000 tons) and a 28,000-ton increase in imports from Mexico (at 1,549,000 tons).

There were no changes in forecast U.S. sugar use numbers for either year.

For Mexico, 2014-15 sugar production was forecast at 5,985,000 tonnes, actual weight, up 45,000 tonnes from June, and exports were forecast at 1,370,000 tonnes, down 136,000 tonnes, with imports and domestic use unchanged, resulting in ending stocks of 1,027,000 tonnes, up 180,000 tonnes, or 21%, from June. For 2015-16, beginning stocks were raised, production was unchanged at 6,000,000 tonnes, imports and domestic use also were unchanged, and exports were raised 23,000 tonnes, to 1,335,000 tonnes, resulting in ending stocks projected at 1,216,000 tonnes, up 157,000 tonnes, or 15%, from the June projection.
Comment on this Article
We welcome your thoughtful comments. Please comply with our Community rules.

 

 


The views expressed in the comments section of Food Business News do not reflect those of Food Business News or its parent company, Sosland Publishing Co., Kansas City, Mo. Concern regarding a specific comment may be registered with the Editor by clicking the Report Abuse link.