Wall Street Futures Slip as Oracle Earnings Miss Reignites AI Spending Concerns 
Silver Spikes to $62.89 on Fed Cut – But Weekly Bearish Divergence Flashes Caution: Don’t Chase, Wait for the Dip 
Australia’s Labour Market Weakens as November Employment Drops Sharply 
Asian Stocks Slip Ahead of Fed Decision as China Deflation Concerns Deepen 
Modi and Trump Hold Phone Call as India Seeks Relief From U.S. Tariffs Over Russian Oil Trade 
Fed Rate Cut Signals Balance Between Inflation and Jobs, Says Mary Daly 
Gold Prices Hold Firm as Markets Await Fed Rate Cut; Silver Surges to Record High 
BOJ Expected to Deliver December Rate Hike as Economists See Borrowing Costs Rising Through 2025 
Fed Near Neutral Signals Caution Ahead, Shifting Focus to Fixed Income in 2026 
Holiday Economic Questions: What Bank of America Says You Should Expect 
Ireland Limits Planned Trade Ban on Israeli Settlements to Goods Only 
Russia Stocks End Flat as Energy and Retail Shares Show Mixed Performance 
Concerns are mounting over the credibility of U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) trade data following a delayed quarterly report and the omission of key explanatory content, according to Reuters interviews with four analysts. The controversy centers on the USDA’s decision to withhold findings that linked tariffs and reduced international demand—driven by sentiments like “Buy Canadian”—to the rising agricultural trade deficit.
The quarterly report, typically co-authored by the USDA’s Economic Research Service (ERS) and Foreign Agricultural Service (FAS), was set for release on May 29 but was pulled at the last minute. Sources say the authors were questioned by officials about attributing the worsening deficit to Trump-era tariffs, despite the administration’s stance that tariffs would benefit U.S. farmers.
The report, eventually released without its usual explanatory text, forecasted the fiscal year 2025 agriculture trade deficit at $49.5 billion—up from $49 billion previously. While USDA insists the data remains accurate, the lack of transparency raised red flags among market participants. “The trade is uneasy about USDA statistics now,” said Charlie Sernatinger of Marex.
Analysts expressed concern over the increasing politicization of economic data. Patrick Westhoff of the University of Missouri warned that staffing cuts—27% of ERS and 14% of FAS—under the Trump administration could further compromise data integrity.
Historically, the U.S. enjoyed a farm trade surplus, but rising imports of high-value goods like alcohol, fruits, and vegetables have shifted the balance. The current deficit raises questions about how protectionist policies and reduced USDA capacity may undermine the reliability of future reports.
This episode, first reported by Politico, underscores broader fears about the objectivity of federal data in a politically charged environment.
