Share your coffee stories with us by writing to info@comunicaffe.com.
MILAN – Improved production prospects and the US administration’s decision to remove tariffs on green coffee imports pushed coffee futures down last week, which hit one-month lows on Friday. It was a week of two halves for ICE Arabica, with strong gains in the first two days, followed by a sharp fall on Wednesday, when the front month (December) dropped by 4.5% and the second position (March 2026), which now accounts for most of the trading, lost as much as 5.7%.
There were also declines, albeit much more modest, in the next two sessions. Thus, the week ended on Friday 14 November, with the December and March contracts at 399.80 and 374 cents, respectively.
It was a week of declining prices at the Ice Robusta, with the contract for January delivery suffering five consecutive losses, closing on 14 November at $4,223, down 9.1% from the previous Friday, the lowest level for the main contract since the end of September.
A series of optimistic forecasts on next year’s production outlook, combined with Safras & Mercado‘s initial estimate for the 2026/27 Brazilian crop, contributed to this sharp downward correction in the middle of the month.
Safras & Mercado optimistic about the 2026/27 Brazilian harvest
The authoritative Brazilian analyst forecasts a 10.5% increase in production, to 71 million bags, with more Arabica coffee and less Robusta coffee than in the previous year.
This figure is in line with an estimate released by StoneX last week.
US drops tariffs on coffee imports
The move by US President Donald Trump to sign an executive order eliminating tariffs on meat, bananas, coffee and another hundred products (from avocados to tomatoes and mangoes) also helped to ease tensions.
The decision was taken because, according to the White House, these tariffs are no longer necessary given the progress made in trade negotiations and because the United States is unable to produce these products in sufficient quantities to meet domestic demand.
According to experts, the administration’s concerns about price trends in the face of an increasingly expensive shopping basket and growing popular discontent influenced the decision.
However, it is not yet certain whether the removal of tariffs will also apply to Brazilian coffee
As Cecafé’s President Márcio Ferreira explains in a note, Brazilian coffee imports in the U.S. are subject to two tariffs: the base tariff of 10% and the additional tariff of 40%.
It is unclear whether the new executive order applies to the base tariff of 10%, the additional tariff of 40% or both. Cecafé is currently in contact with its American counterpart to carefully analyse the situation and understand the unfolding scenario, Ferreira concludes.
The tariffs are also overshadowed by the Supreme Court, which has been called upon to rule on their legality
During last week’s oral arguments, Supreme Court justices questioned Trump’s authority to impose tariffs under the IEEPA, which grants the president wide powers to freeze assets, impose sanctions, and restrict commerce but makes no mention of tariffs.
Some justices, however, pointed out that the act authorizes the president to regulate imports “by means of licenses or otherwise,” and that the term “licenses,” often involving a fee to import goods, is economically comparable to tariffs. Justice Amy Coney Barrett cautioned that overturning the tariffs “could be a mess” for courts tasked with refunding importers.
US President Donald Trump has claimed that his country would face a “national security catastrophe” if the tariffs he introduced against most trading partners this year were ruled illegal.
“The actual number we would have to pay back in tariff revenue and investments would be in excess of $2 trillion, and that, in itself, would be a national security catastrophe,” Tump wrote in a post on Truth Social last week.
Meanwhile, less than a month and a half before they come into force, the situation on the Eudr front remains up in the air
EU countries failed to reach a common position on proposed changes to the bloc’s landmark deforestation rules during a meeting of EU envoys on Wednesday, as divisions persisted over how far to go in reopening the text.
The Danish Council presidency circulated a compromise on Monday introducing some significant changes to the Commission’s original proposal, particularly with regard to the timing of implementation. However, there was no clear majority in favour of the text.
Following proposals put forward by Sweden and Austria, Germany broke the deadlock by presenting its own proposal and formally backing a one-year delay and a 2026 review that could yet fully reopen the legislation, according to an internal document seen by Euractiv.
Circulated on Thursday, the German position paper is close to a previous Austrian proposal, which also calls for a “stop-the-clock” to push the rules back to December 2026 for all operators, as well as further changes to the regulation.
Germany supports the Commission’s simplification for small farmers and foresters in the EU
Berlin also questions a new obligation introduced in the Commission’s October proposal requiring operators to communicate due-diligence statements along the supply chain, arguing it should be dropped.
In addition, a review clause proposed by Germany would instruct the Commission to assess further simplification options by April 2026, to be followed by a report and, where appropriate, new legislative proposals.
It should be noted that France and Spain have rejected any further simplification of the rules.
According to diplomatic sources cited by Euractiv, EU deputy ambassadors will meet again this week in an attempt to reach an agreement.
Time is running out, as an agreement with the European Parliament needs to be reached by the week of 15 December, Euractiv points out.
