United States

Department

of Agriculture

www.ers.usda.gov

Electronic Outlook Report from the Economic Research Service

SSS-237-01

September 2003

Measuring the Effect of Imports

of Sugar-Containing Products on

U.S. Sugar Deliveries

Abstract

After experiencing strong and steady growth during the 1990s, U.S. demand for sugar

has stagnated since 1999. Although there have been no comprehensive explanations for

the decline in sugar and overall sweetener consumption, one hypothesis is that sugars

contained in imported products have increased sufficiently to negatively affect domestic

sugar deliveries. This paper develops and tests this hypothesis by answering three questions. First, what have been the trends in domestic sugar deliveries? Second, how much

sugar has entered the United States in imported products, and how much has left in

exported products? Third, how have increases in imported sugar-containing products

affected deliveries to industrial endusers? Regression analysis strongly supports the

hypothesis that imports of sugar-containing products have been an important factor

explaining reduced sugar deliveries to all industrial endusers except for baking and cereal manufacturers. Nonetheless, imports of sugar-containing products do not explain the

precipitous drop-off in industrial sugar deliveries starting in 2000. More satisfactory

explanations may include reduced activity in the U.S. economy and a drop-off in

demand for baked goods and cereal products attributable to other factors.

Keywords: Sugar, sugar-containing products, imports, sugar deliveries.

Acknowledgments

The author gratefully acknowledges the reviews of Joy Harwood and Daniel Pick of the

Economic Research Service, USDA; John Love of USDA's World Agricultural Outlook

Board; Devry Boughner of the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative; Carol Goodloe

of USDA's Office of the Chief Economist; Barbara Fecso of USDA’s Farm Service

Agency; and Ron Lord of USDA's Foreign Agricultural Service. Excellent support was

provided by the editor, Martha Evans, and the designer, Wynnice Pointer-Napper.

Stephen Haley1

1Haley is an agricultural economist with the Market and Trade Economics Division of the Economic

Research Service, USDA.
After experiencing strong and steady growth during

the 1990s, U.S. demand for sugar has stagnated since

1999. Sugar deliveries for domestic food and beverage

use for 2000 were estimated at 9.977 million short

tons, raw value (STRV), representing no growth from

1999 (9.996 million STRV). Deliveries for 2001 were

estimated at 9.913 million STRV and 9.818 million

STRV for 2002. The 2002 deliveries are 1.8 percent

less than those for 1999. 

Figure 1 shows sugar deliveries to industrial and nonindustrial users since 1992. Yearly growth from 1992

to 1999 averaged 134,000 tons for industrial endusers

and 31,000 tons for non-industrial endusers. Although

growth for non-industrial deliveries has continued

since 1999, it has fallen off for industrial users—it

decreased by 140,000 tons in 2000; 77,000 tons in

2001; and 281,000 tons in 2002. Comparing 2002 with

2001, deliveries are down substantially for the largest

three industrial enduse sectors: bakery and cereal—9.0

percent; confectionery industry—7.2 percent; and the

multiple-use category—8.9 percent. 

There have been no comprehensive explanations for

the decline in sugar and overall sweetener consumption. The decline coincided with a drop in U.S. economic activity, suggesting that aggregate disposable

income and sweetener consumption may be related.

Since 1999, consumption of flour-based products has

been lower as well. Per capita sweetener deliveries

increased by 18.4 pounds from 1991 to 1999, in part

reflecting a switch from foods high in fat content to

foods higher in carbohydrates (including sugar). The

decline since 1999, modest in relation to the growth

since 1991 (3.9 pounds or 21.2 percent), may be

reflective of a reassessment of dietary habits.

Another explanation is that sugars contained in imported products have increased sufficiently to negatively

affect domestic sugar deliveries. A simple motivation

is that sugar is often less expensive outside the United

States because the U.S. sugar program has the effect of

pricing domestic and imported sugar above world levels. Some products containing sugar are manufactured

outside the United States and then brought into the

United States subject to tariff classifications that may

not take account of the sugar contained in them (see

appendix tables 1-4 for duty rates on certain sugarcontaining products). Effectively, more sugar enters

the United States than explicitly allowed under the

U.S. raw and refined sugar tariff-rate quotas. 

Although the issue of sugar in imported products has

been around for years, it is more of a concern now

because these imports directly affect domestic sugar

producers and processors. Prior to 2000, whenever there

was a threat of excess sugar supply, the quantity of

imports could usually be limited by adjusting the sugar

tariff-rate quota downward. However, the United States

bound itself under the terms of the Uruguay Round

Agreement on Agriculture (URAA) to make available a

minimum level of sugar imports equaling 1.256 million

STRV. By fiscal year (FY) 1999, sugar imports were

being allocated close to minimum access levels. In addition, under the North American Free Trade Agreement

(NAFTA), Mexico was given additional access above

the total agreed to under the terms of the URAA, up to

a maximum of 276,000 STRV a year starting in FY

2001. All this implies that excess sugar supply in the

U.S. market cannot be directly or easily rebalanced by

reducing imports. The effect will be felt through lower

prices that could lead to forfeitures under the U.S. sugar

loan program or reduced marketing allotments as set out

in the 2002 Farm Act.

2 Economic Research Service, USDA

Trends in Domestic Sugar Deliveries

Figure 1

U.S. sugar deliveries to industrial and 

non-industrial endusers

Mil. short tons

Source: Economic Research Service, USDA.

1992 94 96 98 2000 02

3

4

5

6

Industrial

Non-industrial
Sugar enters (and exits) the United States in a large

number of products. There is no exact agreement as to

which products contain sugar and the amount of sugar

contained in individual products. Studies like those of

the U.S. International Trade Commission (USITC),

(1993) and Gray and Lord (1989) relied, at least partially, on survey data from manufacturers. While these

studies published partial listings of sugar contained in

certain imported products, they have not been extensively updated. In addition, product codes have

changed or new ones have been introduced, as in the

U.S. Harmonized Tariff Schedule (HTS). 

This study gathered a listing of products organized by

HTS codes that is used by U.S. Department of

Agriculture’s (USDA’s) Foreign Agricultural Service

(FAS) in tracking products that contain sugar. In this

study, sugar content is estimated by multiplying quarterly product imports from the U.S. Census Bureau starting in the first quarter of 1992 by sugar-content coefficients corresponding to the HTS codes under which the

imports (or exports) are classified. Coefficient ranges

are reported in appendix table 1 for sugar confectionery

(HTS chapter 17.04), appendix table 2 for cocoa and

cocoa preparations (HTS chapter 18), appendix table 3

for cereal preparations and bakers’ wares (HTS chapter

19), and appendix table 4 for miscellaneous edible

preparations (HTS chapter 21). Coefficient ranges are

estimates based on examination of prior studies (i.e.,

Gray and Lord and USITC, mentioned previously), and

on article descriptions in the Harmonized Tariff

Schedule of the United States (2002). Although the true

value of a particular coefficient is unknown, it is

assumed to lie between the lower and upper ranges

reported in the appendix tables. 

In this study, two sets of sugar content are estimated.

The first is stochastic, meaning that it is derived from

underlying estimates of parameters. It is called the

base series. It is derived by generating a 1,000-fold set

of sugar estimates in individual products, based on a

randomized selection of coefficient values distributed

uniformly between the reported lower and upper

ranges (described above), multiplied by quarterly

imports of products. Quarterly averages for each product grouping (i.e., sugar confectionery, cocoa preparations, cereal preparations and bakers’ wares, miscellaneous edible products, and the total) are calculated.

The second series is deterministic (meaning that it is

derived from a parameter that is assumed to be

known). The second series is intended to provide a

lower-end limit on the amount of sugar in the products, and as such, uses the lower value of the product

coefficients in the appendix tables for determining the

amount of sugar contained in the products.

Table 1 shows the estimated ranges of sugar contained

in imported products on an annual basis from 1992

through 2002. Yearly base series values average about

30 percent higher than the lower-limit series. There is

not much evidence of growth in either series between

1992 and 1994. Significant growth starts after 1994 and

Economic Research Service, USDA 3

Estimated Sugar Contained in Imported Products

Table 1—Estimated ranges of sugar in certain imported sugar-containing products

Year

Cereal preparations Miscellaneous edible

Sugar confectionery Cocoa preparations and bakers' wares preparations

(HTS chapter 17.04) (HTS chapter 18) (HTS chapter 19) (HTS chapter 21) Total

Base Lower-limit Base Lower-limit Base Lower-limit Base Lower-limit Base Lower-limit

Short tons

1992 123,149 105,694 30,219 24,176 4,781 3,214 44,326 24,498 202,475 157,581

1993 115,476 99,117 29,474 23,607 5,797 3,885 44,897 25,052 195,644 151,661

1994 128,408 110,213 32,552 26,719 9,139 6,097 27,041 20,058 197,140 163,087

1995 156,002 133,876 39,773 26,278 21,573 12,836 69,863 41,334 287,211 214,324

1996 167,587 143,502 47,734 31,741 30,548 18,669 59,933 37,609 305,801 231,521

1997 182,149 155,958 58,999 39,543 42,619 27,570 65,329 39,006 349,096 262,076

1998 204,545 175,909 61,762 41,756 55,351 36,141 85,720 56,455 407,378 310,260

1999 239,685 206,213 69,088 47,370 61,064 38,993 115,580 77,856 485,417 370,432

2000 255,717 220,013 75,501 51,176 64,629 41,476 114,402 72,135 510,248 384,800

2001 277,706 239,021 83,491 58,392 61,576 38,618 128,835 83,148 551,608 419,180

2002 318,418 274,003 91,825 76,192 46,175 32,440 150,069 98,323 606,488 480,958

Source: Economic Research Service, USDA.
continues unabated through 2002. Yearly growth for the

base series is 48,000 tons a year and 38,500 tons a year

for the lower-limit series. Between 1995 and 2002,

sugar in product imports grew from 111 to 124 percent.

Growth for individual enduse sectors are: 105 percent

for sugar confectionery; between 131 and 190 percent

for cocoa preparations; between 114 and 153 percent

for cereal preparations and baker’s wares; and between

115 and 138 percent for miscellaneous products.

Table 2 shows the estimated sugar content of imported

products by year. The proportion of sugar in confectionery products held steady during the time period—

between 60 (lower-limit series) and 70 percent (base

series). This result is expected because little deviation

is assumed in individual sugar coefficient values in

HTS chapter 17.04. Average sugar content in cocoa

preparations dropped from 42-52 percent in 1992-94

to 25-37 percent in 1995-2002. This indicates a

marked increase in imports of products with less sugar

compared with products in the earlier period. The

changes in the other product categories are relatively

smaller increases between 1992-94 and 1995-2002.

These average sugar content estimates can be compared

with earlier period estimates from the Gray and Lord

study. They estimated a sugar content for imported confectionery products of 56 percent during 1983-87,

somewhat lower than estimated in this study for either

1992-94 or 1995-2002. Their estimate of 51 percent for

imported cocoa preparations is within this study’s range

for 1992-94. Their estimate of 24.5 percent for imported

cereal preparations and bakers’ wares is close to this

study’s base series result for 1992-94. The same is the

case for imported miscellaneous edible products, where

their result of 32.8 percent is close to the base series of

33.2 percent for 1992-94.

Figure 2 shows quarterly sugar use in the United

States between 1995 and 2002. The bottom series plotted in the figure shows domestic sugar deliveries to

industrial endusers, and the top series adds in the sugar

contained in imported products (base series). The general pattern of the two series is similar but the gap

between the two has been consistently growing. There

does not seem to be a single point where the two series

radically diverge. 

4 Economic Research Service, USDA

Table 2—Estimated average sugar content in certain imported sugar-containing products

Year

Cereal preparations Miscellaneous edible

Sugar confectionery Cocoa preparations and bakers' wares preparations

(HTS chapter 17.04) (HTS chapter 18) (HTS chapter 19) (HTS chapter 21) Total

Base Lower-limit Base Lower-limit Base Lower-limit Base Lower-limit Base Lower-limit

Percentage

1992 69.91 60.00 51.37 41.10 26.24 17.64 32.04 17.71 51.71 40.25

1993 69.90 60.00 51.35 41.13 26.11 17.49 35.29 19.69 52.59 40.77

1994 69.91 60.00 54.39 44.64 28.94 19.31 31.79 23.58 54.73 45.28

1995 69.89 59.98 35.55 23.49 29.04 17.28 32.28 19.10 45.90 34.25

1996 70.07 60.00 36.41 24.21 29.72 18.16 31.68 19.88 46.18 34.96

1997 70.06 59.98 36.41 24.40 32.03 20.72 33.09 19.76 46.39 34.83

1998 69.76 60.00 36.63 24.77 32.57 21.27 38.95 25.65 47.83 36.42

1999 69.74 60.00 37.63 25.80 31.66 20.22 40.92 27.57 48.42 36.95

2000 69.73 60.00 37.20 25.22 31.67 20.32 38.35 24.18 47.60 35.89

2001 69.71 60.00 38.85 27.17 31.00 19.44 37.21 24.02 47.63 36.19

2002 69.72 60.00 36.46 30.25 22.32 15.68 37.76 24.74 46.20 36.64

Source: Economic Research Service, USDA.

Figure 2

Industrial U.S. sugar use, by quarters, 

1995-2002

1,000 short tons

Source: Economic Research Service, USDA.

Domestic deliveries

Industrial sugar use

1995 96 97 98 99 2000 01 02

1,100

1,200

1,300

1,400

1,500

1,600

1,700
Figure 2 indicates two interesting periods, however.

The first is the second quarter of 2000. The secondquarter pattern for previous years had been for strong

increases relative to the preceding first quarter. For

1999, the increase had been 195,000 tons, shared

between domestic deliveries of 177,000 tons and sugar

in imported products of 18,000 tons. The second-quarter increase in 2000 was much less: 30,000 tons,

shared between domestic deliveries of 19,000 tons and

sugar in imported products of 11,000 tons. Most of the

decrease occurred in domestic deliveries, although

imported sugar-containing products decreased as well

but not nearly as much in percentage terms. The second interesting period is the third quarter of 2001. The

pattern before 2000 was for an increase over the

already-high second-quarter total. The second quarter

2001 increase was 85,000 tons, shared between

domestic deliveries of 72,000 tons and sugar in

imported products of 13,000 tons. The next quarter

saw a decrease of 50,000 tons instead of the expected

increase. Domestic deliveries fell by 62,000 tons while

sugar in imported products increased by 12,000 tons.

Events in these two periods suggest that adjustment

volatility is occurring in domestic deliveries, with the

trend of increased sugar in imported products not

severely affected. 

Figure 3 shows the percentage of industrial sugar use

contributed by imports of sugar-containing products,

for the base and lower-limit series. The two series suggest that in 1995, sugar from imported products constituted between 4 to 5.3 percent of total industrial sugar

use. The growth of the import-product share has been

very consistent through 2002, where the share is estimated to be between 8.8 and 11.2 percent. Shares in

the last three-quarters of 2002 are noticeably above

trend growth.

Figure 4 shows the growth in sugar content from 1995

to 2002 for product imports from Canada, Mexico, and

all other countries. Period growth for Canada was 115

percent, and corresponding growth for Mexico was 291

percent. Canada’s yearly share of the sugar-containing

exports to the United States has fluctuated from 43 to

51 percent, and Mexico’s share has increased from 12

percent in 1995 to 21 percent in 2002.

Economic Research Service, USDA 5

Figure 3

Percentage of industrial sugar use attributed 

to sugar-containing product imports

Percent

Source: Economic Research Service, USDA.

Base series

1995 96 97 98 99 2000 01 02

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

Linear (Base series)

Linear (Lower-limit series) Lower-limit series

Figure 4

Estimated sugar in sugar-containing products 

from Canada, Mexico, and Rest-of-World

1,000 short tons

Source: Economic Research Service, USDA.

Canada

Mexico

Rest-of-World

1995 97 99 2001

0

50

100

150

200

250

300
The same procedure used to calculate sugar in imported products can be applied to U.S. exports of likeproducts. Although the price of U.S. sugar is above

world levels, sugar in many other countries is priced

higher than in the United States. Also, the sugar contained in exported products may constitute a relatively

small portion of the total value of the product being

exported; that is, other factors may favor the U.S.

export of the product and outweigh the negative effect

of higher-priced U.S. sugar contained in the product.

Also, there is a Sugar-Containing Products Re-export

Program, administered by the USDA, which allows

U.S. refiners to import world-priced raw sugar, provided that an equivalent amount of refined sugar is

exported in products within an 18-month period. 

Table 3 shows estimated sugar contained in exported

products, organized by product category. Yearly

growth of sugar contained in exported products

through 2001 is estimated between 16,250 tons (lowerlimit series) and 21,800 tons (base series). This growth

is only about 43 percent of the corresponding growth

in sugar in imported products. Product exports in 2002

fell to 1996 levels for the base series. 

Most product-exported sugar has been contained in

cereal preparations and bakers’ wares—about 40 percent. Sugar exported in miscellaneous edible preparations was the next highest—between 23 and 25 percent. Sugar exported in confectionery is estimated at

about 20 percent of the total, and sugar in cocoa

preparations, between 14 and 17 percent. 

Sugar contained in exports in 1992-94 is estimated to

have been between 12 to 34 percent higher than sugar

contained in imported products. Imports of sugar-containing products began their growth after 1994. By 1998,

sugar in imported products exceeded sugar in exported

products. In 2001, sugar in imported products is estimated to have been between 23 and 33 percent higher than

sugar in exported products. Corresponding figures in

2002 are estimated between 79 and 86 percent.

6 Economic Research Service, USDA

Estimated Sugar in Exported Products

Table 3—Estimated ranges of sugar in certain exported sugar-containing products 

Year

Cereal preparations Miscellaneous edible

Sugar confectionery Cocoa preparations and bakers' wares preparations

(HTS chapter 17.04) (HTS chapter 18) (HTS chapter 19) (HTS chapter 21) Total

Base Lower-limit Base Lower-limit Base Lower-limit Base Lower-limit Base Lower-limit

Short tons

1992 51,740 44,227 39,727 28,900 98,213 47,334 51,527 38,943 241,207 159,404

1993 60,843 52,013 58,289 45,200 111,748 55,731 47,897 34,827 278,778 187,771

1994 67,295 57,536 52,133 40,783 120,203 61,801 38,988 27,804 278,619 187,924

1995 63,604 54,376 43,035 32,588 129,739 68,629 78,248 59,952 314,626 215,546

1996 66,359 56,729 44,015 32,600 137,920 78,304 85,761 65,734 334,055 233,367

1997 79,806 68,227 44,919 34,572 165,290 92,862 90,925 69,295 380,940 264,955

1998 75,979 64,952 43,328 32,069 170,244 93,888 91,314 69,832 380,865 260,742

1999 74,891 64,020 43,488 32,808 163,231 95,181 96,911 73,576 378,521 265,586

2000 85,002 72,658 63,660 49,107 183,321 105,507 106,073 80,590 438,056 307,862

2001 87,671 74,937 78,579 66,035 179,198 105,806 104,199 78,176 449,647 324,954

2002 54,937 47,016 69,792 48,221 96,897 74,704 116,268 88,032 337,895 257,973

Source: Economic Research Service, USDA.
A closely-watched data series maintained by the

USDA is per capita sweetener consumption. It

includes estimates of consumption of refined sugar,

high fructose corn syrup, other corn syrups, honey,

maple syrup, and other edible syrups. These consumption series are derived from delivery, production, and

trade data series collected and maintained by the

USDA and the U.S. Customs Service. It is not the

practice to make adjustments based on trade in products that contain these basic sweeteners. Other than

sugar, however, it is unlikely that such adjustments

would matter very much. This study allows a consideration of the effect of trade in sugar-containing products on per capita sweetener consumption. 

The current procedure for calculating per capita consumption is based on total deliveries of sugar for domestic food and beverage use, collected by USDA’s Farm

Service Agency and measured in short tons, raw value. It

is converted into refined value by dividing the total by

1.07. Sugar delivered to food manufacturers as part of

USDA’s Products Re-export Program is not counted

because it is intended for export and not domestic consumption. However, sugar contained in recorded exports

include this sugar plus sugar not covered in any program. In order not to double-count, the sugar delivered

in the Products Re-export Program should be added to

the amount delivered for domestic food and beverage

use before making any traded product adjustments.

Before 1998, sugar in exported products exceeded sugar

in imported products. For example, in 1992 exported

sugar in products was equivalent to 1.9 pounds per capita, compared with 1.6 pounds in imported products. The

net adjustment was a negative 0.3 pound. After 1992,

sugar in exported products started increasing: from 2.1

pounds per capita to 2.8 pounds in 1997 and 3.2 pounds

in 2001. Sugar in imported products was equal to 1.5

pounds per capita in 1993 and 1994, and then started

growing—to 2.6 pounds in 1997 and 3.9 pounds in

2001. The net adjustment to per capita sweetener consumption in 2001 was 0.7 pound. 

Figure 5 shows per capita sweetener consumption with

and without the adjustment for trade in sugar-containing products. The two series are close, with actual per

capita consumption higher than the series that excludes

the sugar in product trade. Both series show per capita

consumption peaking in 1999. Including sugar from

traded products reveals only a slight upward revision

to the overall decline from 1999. The implication is

that the recent decline in sugar deliveries cannot be

solely explained by increased product imports.

Economic Research Service, USDA 7

Implications for Calculated Per Capita Sweetener Consumption

Figure 5

Per capita U.S. sweetener deliveries

Pounds

Source: Economic Research Service, USDA.

Per capita U.S. sweetener deliveries

(excluding trade in sugar-containing products)

Adjusted for trade in sugar-containing products

1992 94 96 98 2000

125

130

135

140

145

150

155

Adjusted for SCP

Per capita sweetener deliveries 136.1 139.1 141.6 144.1 144.7 147.7 149.0 151.3

136.5 139.4 141.9 144.5 145.2 148.5 150.2 153.0

148.9 147.3

149.9 148.8
It is hypothesized that the increase in imports of sugarcontaining products has contributed to a decline in

domestic sugar deliveries to industrial endusers.

Evidence presented in previous sections suggests that

the displacement effect has been steady since 1994;

that is, the recent downturn in industrial deliveries is

probably explained by other factors. 

In order to test this hypothesis, quarterly industrial

sugar deliveries are initially assumed to be a function

of seasonal factors (Q1, Q2, and Q3), an underlying

trend, population, real per capita gross domestic product (GDP), and sugar in imported products. Added to

these factors is a variable representing the recent time

period that has the effect of capturing unexplained

recent events upon industrial sugar deliveries.

Formally, a regression equation as follows can be estimated over the period from the first quarter of 1995

through the fourth quarter of 2002:

where:

The sugar content variable is calculated using the base

series values estimated earlier. (Sensitivity of the

results using the lower-limit series is examined later.)

The Qi represent the first three quarters of the calendar

year. The ‘D’ variable is assigned a value of 0 except

for the recent period where deliveries have been down,

where a value of 1 is assigned. The coefficient on the

D variable captures the effect of unexplained recent

events. The quarters that are assigned the value 1 are

chosen on the basis of improving the fit of the equation, or alternatively, minimizing out-of-sample forecast error variance. The criterion used to measure this

aspect is called the Schwarz Information Criterion.

This criterion is also used to examine competing equation specifications. When examining alternatives, the

equation with the lowest Schwarz criterion value represents the best equation for making out-of-sample

predictions for the dependent variable (i.e., industrial

sugar deliveries).

Equation results are shown in table 4 for three alternative specifications. The first equation has the lowest

valued Schwarz criterion (1a), followed by the equation with the next lowest value (1b), and followed by

the remaining equation (1c). The first equation omits

population as an explanatory variable, retaining the

others. The second equation contains real per capita

GDP and population. The third equation omits real per

capita GDP and keeps population. In all three specifications, the coefficient on the sugar content variable is

significantly negative, as hypothesized. The sugar content coefficient in the first equation has the largest tstatistic compared with the same coefficient in the

other two equations. There is some evidence that unexplained events occurring after the second quarter of

2001 may have been significant in explaining the

decrease in industrial sugar deliveries. However, the

evidence is the weakest in the case of the first equation

(the one with the best predictive characteristics).

A problem with an ordinary regression analysis is that

it is difficult to directly compare coefficient values

because the equation variables are scaled in different

units with differing variances. However, it is possible

to rescale variables such as sugar deliveries, real per

capita GDP, and the sugar content ratio to make direct

comparison of estimated coefficients (called “beta”

coefficients) possible. These variables are normalized

by subtracting each observation by their respective

mean and then by dividing the difference by their

respective standard deviation. In the subsequent

regression, a beta coefficient of “y.xx” means that a 1-

standard deviation change in the explanatory variable

leads to a “y.xx” standard deviation change in the

industrial sugar deliveries.

Table 5 shows the resulting beta coefficients. The

dependent variables (i.e., industrial sugar deliveries) in

the table 5 equations are expressed in per capita terms

rather than actual delivery totals in order to minimize

factors associated with population growth. Also, the

analysis disaggregates deliveries into various categories to see whether differing sorts of product imports

have had differing effects on the differing components

8 Economic Research Service, USDA

Estimating the Effect of Sugar in Imported Products on Deliveries

β ε

β β

α α β

α α α

+ * Sugar content ratio+

+ * (Population)+ * (GDP per capita)

Q + * Q + * trend + * D(2001 : q 2002 : q )

(Industrial sugar deliveries)= + * Q + *

3

1 2

2 3 3 4 0

0 1 1 2

Log Log

3 4

Log

−

industrialsugar deliveries

Sugar in imported product+

imported product

Sugar in 

Sugar content ratio=
of industrial sugar deliveries. These components

include deliveries to: the confectionery industry, baking and cereal manufacturers, the processed food

industry, and multiple-product industries.

Equations 2a and 2b are alternative equations, having

per capita sugar deliveries to industrial endusers as the

dependent variable. Equation 2a includes the variable

for the last four quarters, and 2b excludes it.

Comparison of Schwarz criterion values in the last column reveals that 2a has better predictive characteristics

(its criterion value is lower). In that equation, the coefficient on the recent time period is significantly negative.

The coefficient on the sugar content variable is significantly negative as well. Both equations indicate the

coefficients on sugar content and real per capita GDP

are equal in magnitude although opposite in sign, suggesting that both variables affect industrial sugar deliveries about the same in size but opposite in direction. 

The next four equations show per capita sugar deliveries

to the confectionery industry, baking and cereal industry, processed food industry, and industries comprising

the multiple-use category, respectively. Only in equation

2d, where deliveries to the baking and cereal manufacturers are being analyzed, is the coefficient on the recent

time period significant. In the other equations, its value

cannot be significantly differentiated from zero. Also in

equation 2d, the coefficient on sugar content is significantly positive. In the other equations, the sugar content

coefficients are significantly negative. In equation 2c

(confectionery industry) and 2f (multiple-use category),

the magnitude of the sugar content coefficient in

absolute terms is larger than the corresponding coefficient value on per capita GDP. 

In summary, these equations support the hypothesis that

imports of sugar-containing products have negatively

affected sugar deliveries to the confectionery industry,

processed food industry, and the multiple-use industries.

Changes in sugar-containing product imports have been

more important in explaining changes in sugar deliveries to the confectionery and multiple-use industries than

have changes in per capita GDP. The opposite is true for

the processed food industry, where also a negative trend

growth factor has been in evidence. Analysis does not

support the hypothesis of sugar-containing product

imports affecting deliveries to the baking and cereal

industry. Although per capita GDP has been important,

events in the last two quarters of 2001 and over 2002

have been important as well for the baking and cereal

industries.

Lastly, table 6 compares results from the table 5 equations with similarly specified equations, but using

sugar content implied by the lower-limit series instead

of the base series. The results (i.e., coefficient values,

significance levels, adjusted R2, Durbin-Watson statistic) are nearly similar. In all equations except the one

for bakery and cereal, the Schwarz criterion values are

lower for the equations with the base sugar content

variable, suggesting better prediction properties than

those using the series with the lower-limit sugar content. 

Economic Research Service, USDA 9

Table 4—U.S. sugar deliveries: Estimating the effect of seasonality, population, per capita GDP, and imported 

sugar-containing products1

Equation number Constant Coefficient values 2 Ratio of sugar in Summary statistics

1st 2nd 3rd 2001:3q- Log of U.S. Log of per imported Adjusted Durbin- Schwarz

quarter quarter quarter 2002:4q population capita GDP products 3 R2 Watson Criterion

Log of sugar deliveries to

 industrial endusers

 Eq. No. 1a -- -- 0.071 0.112 -0.026 1.380 -0.027 0.883 1.581 -4.467

(7.567) (11.979) (1.649) (633.178) (8.649)

 Eq. No. 1b -- -- 0.071 0.112 -0.047 0.171 1.052 -0.019 0.885 1.650 -4.411

(7.645) (12.055) (1.986) (1.182) (3.794) (2.374)

 Eq. No. 1c -38.713 -- 0.069 0.112 -0.090 2.724 -- -0.021 0.882 1.506 -4.385

(3.306) (7.137) (11.769) (6.206) (4.509) (2.156)

1 Observation period: First quarter of 1995 (1995:1) through fourth quarter of 2002 (2002:4).

2 T-statistics are in parentheses below coefficient values.

3 For deliveries to industrial endusers, the ratio equals the percentage of sugar in imported products divided by the sum of sugar in 

imported products and deliveries to industrial endusers. 

Source: Economic Research Service, USDA.

 --
10 Economic Research Service, USDA Table 5—U.S. sugar deliveries to industrial endusers: Estimating the effect of sugar contained in imported products1 Equation Dependent Variable 2 Coefficient values 3 Summary statistics Number Constant Seasonality coefficients 2001:3q- Trend Beta coefficients 4 Adjusted Durbin- Schwarz 1st quarter 2nd quarter 3rd quarter 2002:4q Per capita sugar Per capita GDP Auto- R2 Watson Criterion contained in in real 1996 regressive products 5 dollars term 2a Per capita sugar -0.540 1.096 1.762 -0.932 -0.605 0.586 -- 0.887 1.570 1.101 deliveries to industrial (5.094) (7.500) (12.061) (2.668) (2.289) (3.091) endusers 2b Per capita sugar -0.711 -- 1.096 1.749 -- -- -1.215 0.950 -- 0.861 1.467 1.235 deliveries to industrial (7.635) (6.770) (10.820) (8.286) (6.498) endusers (alternative) 2c Per capita sugar -- -0.744 -- 0.919 -- -- -1.283 0.494 -- 0.771 1.718 -- deliveries to confectionery (4.107) (5.197) (6.704) (2.670) industry 2d Per capita sugar deliveries -- 0.572 0.885 1.995 -1.447 -0.020 0.785 -- 0.641 1.565 -- to baking and cereal mfg. (1.666) (2.574) (5.771) (4.375) (2.148) (4.877) industries 2e Per capita sugar deliveries -- -- 1.295 1.844 -- -0.028 -0.285 0.450 -- 0.916 1.681 -- to processed food (9.843) (11.124) (9.578) (3.003) (5.787) industries 2f Per capita sugar deliveries -- -- -- 0.270 -- -- -1.236 0.507 0.288 0.767 1.701 -- to industries comprising (1.635) (5.469) (2.130) (2.120) USDA's multiple use category 6 1 Observation period: First quarter of 1995 (1995:1) through the fourth quarter of 2002 (2002:4). 2 Dependent and independent variables are normalized by subtracting the variables by their means and dividing the result by their estimated standard deviations. 3 T-statistics are in parentheses below coefficient values. 4 Beta coefficient interpretation: A one-standard deviation change in the independent variable (sugar in imported product or per capita GDP) leads to a standard deviation change in the dependent variable (sugar deliveries) equal to the value of the beta coefficient. 5 The range of imported sugar-containing products differs across equations: Eq. 2a and 2b: All products shown in appendix. Eq. 2c: Products listed in appendix tables A-1 (HTS chapter 17.04) and A-2 (HTS chapter 18). Eq. 2d: Products listed in appendix table A-3 (HTS chapter 19). Eq. 2e: Products listed in appendix table A-4 (HTS chapter 21). Eq. 2f: All products shown in appendix. 6 Indicator variable for the second quarter of 1998 entered into the equation: Coefficient value equal to 1.873, with t-statistic equal to 4.015. Source: Economic Research Service, USDA.
Economic Research Service, USDA 11

Table 6—Comparison of regression results for sugar-containing products: Base series and lower-limit series

Alternative equations for dependent variables:

Deliveries to:

industrial endusers1 Confectionery ind. Baker and cereal mfg. Processed food ind. Multiple use

Alternatives based on sugar-containing products series: Base and lower-limit:

Base Lower Base Lower Base Lower Base Lower Base Lower

Short tons

Regression statistics:

 Beta coefficient: -0.605 -0.532 -1.283 -1.232 0.785 0.764 -0.285 -0.234 -1.236 -1.227

 Sugar-containing product 1/ 2/ (2.289) (2.048) (6.704) (6.446) (4.877) (5.079) (3.003) (1.882) (5.469) (5.134)

 Beta coefficient: 0.586 0.534 0.494 0.442 -- -- 0.450 0.430 0.507 0.482

 Per capita GDP (3.091) (2.876) (2.670) (2.393) (5.787) (3.705) (2.130) (1.893)

 Regression coefficient: Indicator -0.932 -1.009 -- -- -1.447 -1.329 -- -- -- --

 variable for 2001:3 - 2002:4 (2.668) (2.891) (4.375) (4.141)

Adjusted R2 0.887 0.883 0.771 0.759 0.641 0.655 0.916 0.912 0.767 0.761

Durbin-Watson 1.570 1.574 1.718 1.723 1.565 1.615 1.681 2.066 1.701 1.764

Schwarz Criterion 1.101 1.135 1.665 1.713 2.255 2.215 0.727 0.848 1.754 1.778

1 Standardization is accomplished by subtracting the variable by its mean and dividing the difference by its standard deviation.

2 T-statistic are in parentheses below the coefficient value.

Source: Economic Research Service, USDA.
12 Economic Research Service, USDA

Conclusions

References

Since 1999, there has been a decline in industrial sugar

deliveries, especially to bakery and cereal manufacturers, the confectionery industry, and the multiple sugar

use industries. Increases in the imports of sugar-containing products may have affected these and other

industrial use deliveries. The sugar contained in

imported products increased from 111 to 124 percent

between 1995 and 2002. Yearly increases during this

period have been between 38,500 and 48,000 tons.

Total sugar in imported products has exceeded that in

exported products since 1998. In 1995 sugar contained

in imported products constituted between 4.0 and 5.3

percent of total sugar in industrial uses. By 2002, this

range had increased to between 8.8 and 11.2 percent.

Estimated per capita consumption of sugar contained

in imported products has grown from 2.1 pounds in

1995 to 3.9 pounds in 2001. Regression analysis

strongly supports the hypothesis that imports of sugarcontaining products have been an important factor for

explaining reduced sugar deliveries to all industrial

endusers except for baking and cereal manufacturers.

Nonetheless, imports of sugar-containing products do

not explain the precipitous drop-off in industrial sugar

deliveries starting in 2000. More satisfactory explanations may include reduced activity in the U.S. economy and a drop-off in demand for baked goods and

cereal products attributable to other factors.

Gray, Fred, and Ron Lord, “U.S. Imports of SugarContaining Products, 1977-88.” Sugar and

Sweetener Situation and Outlook Report. USDA,

ERS, SSR14 N3, September 1989

U.S. International Trade Commision, Certain Articles

Containing Sugar. USITC Publ. 2626, April 1993.
Economic Research Service, USDA 13

Appendix Tables

Appendix table 1—HTS codes and duty rates for sugar-containing products and coefficient range for sugar

content: Chapter 17.40

HTS code Sugar content coefficients General Mexico

Low High duty (NAFTA)

(1704100000) CHEWING GUM, WHETHER OR NOT SUGAR COATED 0.60 0.80 4% Free

(1704901000) CANDIED NUTS READY FOR CONSUMPTION 0.60 0.80 4.50% Free

(1704902000) CONFECTIONS/SWEETMEATS READY FOR CONSUMPTION NESOI 0.60 0.80

(1704902005) CONFECTION READY FOR CONSUMPTION,NESOI,RETAIL SALE 0.60 0.80

(1704902010) CONFECTIONS READY FOR CONSUMPTION,NESOI,NOT RETAIL 0.60 0.80

(1704902500) COUGH DROPS 0.60 0.80 Free

(1704903505) CONFECTION READY FOR CONSUMPTION,NESOI,RETAIL SALE 0.60 0.80 5.60% Free

(1704903510) CONFECTIONS READY FOR CONSUMPTION,NESOI,NOT RETAIL 0.60 0.80

(1704903520) CONFEC. FOR CONSUMPTION, CONTN PEANUTS, RETAIL SALE 0.60 0.80

(1704903550) CONFECTION READY FOR CONSUMPTION,NESOI,RETAIL SALE 0.60 0.80

(1704903590) CONFECTIONS READY FOR CONSUMPTION,NESOI,NOT RETAIL 0.60 0.80

(1704905200) SUGR CONFECTNRY NO COCOA,NESOI,SEE GENERAL NOTE 15 0.60 0.80 12.20% Free

(1704905400) SUGAR CONFECTIONERY,DAIRY PRODUCT,ADDTL U S NTE 10 0.60 0.80 12.20%

(1704905800) SUGAR CONFECTIONERY,DAIRY PRODUCT,NESOI 0.60 0.80 40 cents/kg+10.4% Free

(1704906400) SUGAR CONFCTNRY,NESOI,>65% SUGAR,ADDTL U S NOTE 7 0.65 0.90 12.20%

(1704906800) SUGAR CONFCTNRY,NESOI,CONTNG >65% SUGAR,NESOI 0.65 0.90 40 cents/kg+10.4% Free

(1704907400) SUGAR CONFCTNRY,NESOI,>10% SUGAR,ADDTL U S NOTE 8 0.10 0.40 12.20%

(1704907800) SUGAR CONFCTNRY,NESOI,CONTNG >10% SUGAR, NESOI 0.10 0.40 40 cents/kg+10.4% Free

(1704909000) SUGR CONFECTNRY NT CNTG COCOA NT RETAIL SALE NESOI 0.60 0.80 10.40% Free

Sources: U.S. International Trade Commission (duty rates), and Economic Research Service, USDA (sugar content coefficients).
14 Economic Research Service, USDA

Appendix table 2—HTS codes and duty rates for sugar-containing products and coefficient range for sugar

content: Chapter 18

HTS code Sugar content coefficients General Mexico

Low High duty (NAFTA)

(1806100500) GEN NOTE 15 COCOA POWDR SWTN CNTN<65% SUGAR BY WT 0.40 0.65 Free

(1806101000) ADDTL NOTE 1 COCOA POWDR SWTN CNTN<65% SUGAR BY WT 0.40 0.65 Free

(1806101500) COCOA PWDR SWTND CNTN<65% BY DRY WT OF SUGAR NESOI 0.40 0.65 21.7cents/kg Free

(1806102200) GEN NOTE 15 COCOA PWDR SWTN >65% <90% BY WT SUGAR 0.65 0.90 10.0% Free

(1806102800) COCOA PWDR SWTN>65% SUGR ADDTL NOTE 2-CHAP17 NESOI 0.65 0.90 33.6cents/kg Free

(1806103400) ADDTL NOTE 1 COCOA PWDR SWTN >65% <90% DRY WT SUGR 0.65 0.90 10.0%

(1806103800) COCOA PWDR SWTN OV 65% BT LSS THAN 90% SUGAR NESOI 0.65 0.90 33.6cents/kg Free

(1806104300) GEN NOTE 15 COCOA PWDR SWTND CNTN 90%> DRY WT SUGR 0.90 0.95 10.0% Free

(1806105500) ADDTL NOTE 2-CH17 COCOA PWDR SWTNED 90%>SUGR NESOI 0.90 0.95 33.6cents/kg Free

(1806106500) ADDTL NOTE 1 COCOA POWDER SWEETEND CONT 90%OR MORE 0.90 0.95 10.0%

(1806107500) COCOA POWDER SWEETEND CONT 90% OR MORE SUGAR NESOI 0.90 0.95 33.6cents/kg Free

(1806202200) GEN NOTE 15 CHOCOLATE BULK FORM NESOI CNTN BTRFAT 0.30 0.50 5.0% Free

(1806202400) ADDTL NOTE2 CHOCOLATE BULK FORM NESOI>5.5% BTTRFAT 0.30 0.50 5.0%

(1806202600) CHOCOLATE BLK FRM NESOI>5.5% BUTTRFAT,<21%MLK SLID 0.30 0.50 37.2cents/kg+4.3% Free

(1806202800) CHOCOLATE BULK FORM NESOI OVER 5.5% BUTTRFAT NESOI 0.30 0.50 52.8cents/kg+4.3% Free

(1806203400) ADDTL NOTE 3 CHOCOLATE BULK NESOI NOV 5.5% BTTRFAT 0.30 0.50 5.0%

(1806203600) CHOCOLATE BULK FORM NESOI<5.5% BTTRFT<21% MLK SLDS 0.30 0.50 37.2cents/kg+4.3% Free

(1806203800) CHOCOLATE BULK FORM NESOI NOV 5.5% BUTTRFAT NESOI 0.30 0.50 52.8cents/kg+4.3% Free

(1806205000) CHOCOLATE BULK NESOI NOT CNTN BFAT/MLK SLDS, NESOI 0.30 0.50 4.3% Free

(1806206000) CONFECTIONERS COATINGS/PRODS 6.8% COCOA SOLID BULK 0.40 0.60 2.0% Free

(1806207100) ADDTL NOTE 7-CH 17 COCOA PREP BULK NESOI,>65% SUGR 0.65 0.90 10.0%

(1806207300) ADDTL US NOTE 2-CH17 COCOA PREP BULK NESOI>65%SUGR 0.65 0.90 30.5cents/kg+8.5% Free

(1806207500) ADDTL NOTE 8-CH17 COCOA PREP BULK NESOI,>10% SUGAR 0.10 0.40 10.0%

(1806207800) COCOA PREP BULK NESOI 65%/MORE SUGAR NESOI 0.65 0.90 8.5% Free

(1806207900) GEN NOTE 15 COCOA PREPS NESOI, IN BULK FORMS 0.10 0.40 10.0% Free

(1806208100) COCOA PREP(DAIRY)BULK NESOI<65%SUGR ADDTL NTE4-CH4 0.50 0.65 10.0%

(1806208200) COCOA PREP(DAIRY)BULK NESOI<21% MLK SOLD AD NT-CH4 0.10 0.40 37.2cents/kg+8.5% Free

(1806208300) COCOA PREP(DAIRY)BLK NESOI<65%SUGAR,ADTL NOTE4-CH4 0.50 0.65 52.8cents/kg+8.5% Free

(1806208700) COCOA PREP(LOW FAT CHCLT) BULK NESOI<21% MLK SOLDS 0.10 0.40 37.2cents/kg+8.5% Free

(1806208900) COCOA PREP(LOW FAT CHCLT CRMB) BULK NESOI<65% SUGR 0.50 0.65 52.8cents/kg+8.5% Free

(1806209400) COCOA PREP(BLND SYRPS)BULK NESOI<65% SUGR AD4-CH17 0.50 0.65 37.2cents/kg+8.5% Free

(1806209500) COCOA PREP BULK NESOI <65% >10%SUGR ADD NTE 8-CH17 0.10 0.65 10.0%

(1806209800) COCOA PREP BULK NESOI <65% >10% SUGR ADDTL 3-CH 17 0.10 0.65 37.2cents/kg+8.5% Free

(1806209900) COCOA PREP BULK NESOI 65% OR LESS SUGAR, NESOI 0.50 0.65 8.5% Free

(1806320100) CHCLT BARS ETC NT BULK UNFILLD GEN NOTE 15 0.40 0.60 5.0% Free

(1806320400) CHCLT BARS NT BULK UNFLLD >5.5% BTTERFAT ADTL NOT2 0.40 0.60 5.0%

(1806320600) CHCLT BARS ETC NT BULK UNFLLD<21% MLK SOLDS GEN 15 0.40 0.60 37.2cents/lb+4.3% Free

(1806320800) CHCLT BARS ETC NT BLK UNFLLD >5.5% BUTERFAT NESOI 0.40 0.60 52.8cents/lb+4.3% Free

(1806321400) CHCLT BARS ETC NT BLK UNFLLD<5.5%BTTRFT ADTL NOTE3 0.40 0.60 5.0%

(1806321600) CHOCOLATE BARS ETC NT BULK UNFILLD <21% MILK SOLSD 0.40 0.60 37.2cents/lb+4.3% Free

(1806321800) CHOCOLATE BARS ETC NT BULK UNFILLD < 5.5% BUTTERFT 0.40 0.60 52.8cents/lb+4.3% Free

(1806323000) CHOC/COCOA PREP BAR ETC NTOV2KG EXC FILLD/CNFCTNRY 0.40 0.60 4.3% Free
Economic Research Service, USDA 15

Appendix table 2—HTS codes and duty rates for sugar-containing products and coefficient range for sugar

content: Chapter 18--Continued

HTS code Sugar content coefficients General Mexico

Low High duty (NAFTA)

(1806325500) COCOA PREPS, NESOI, BAR ETC, UNFILLD, GEN NOTE 15 0.40 0.60 7.0% Free

(1806326000) COCOA PRPS(DAIRY)NESOI BAR ETC UNFLLD ADD/NOT1-CH4 0.40 0.60 7.0%

(1806327000) COCOA PREPS UNFLLD DAIRY<21%MLK SOLDSL ADDTL 1-CH4 0.40 0.60 37.2cents/kg+6% Free

(1806328000) DAIRY PRDUCTS NESOI BAR ETC UNFLLD US ADD NTE1/CH4 0.40 0.60 52.8cents/kg+6% Free

(1806329000) CHOC/COCOA PREP BAR NOT OVER 2KG NESOI EXCPT FILLD 0.40 0.60 6.0% Free

(1806900100) COCOA PREPS NESOI NT BULK NT RETAIL GENERAL NOTE15 0.40 0.60 3.5% Free

(1806900500) COCOA PRPS NESOI NT BLK NT RETAIL ADDTL NOTE10-CH4 0.10 0.40 3.5%

(1806900800) COCOA PRPS(DAIRY)<21%MLK SLDS NESOI ADTL NTE10-CH4 0.40 0.60 37.2cents/lb+6% Free

(1806901000) COCOA PREPS NESOI NT BLK NT RETAIL ADDTL NTE10-CH4 0.40 0.60 52.8cents/kg+6% Free

(1806901500) COCOA PRPS NESOI NT BLK/RETAIL>5.5%BTTRFT ADTL NT2 0.40 0.60 3.5%

(1806901800) COCOA PRPS NESOI NT BLK/RETAIL < 21% MILK SOLIDS 0.40 0.60 37.2cents/lb+6% Free

(1806902000) COCOA PREPS NESOI NT BULK NT RETAIL <5.5%BUTTERFAT 0.40 0.60 52.8cents/kg+6% Free

(1806902500) COCOA PRPS NESOI NT BLK/RETAIL>5.5%BTTRFT ADD NTE3 0.40 0.60 3.5%

(1806902800) COCOA PREPS NESOI NT BULK NT RETAIL <21% MLK SOLDS 0.40 0.60 37.2cents/kg+6% Free

(1806903000) COCOA PREPS NESOI NT BULK NT RETAIL NESOI 0.40 0.60 52.8cents/kg+6% Free

(1806903900) COCOA PRPS(SYRPS)NESOI NT BLK/RETAIL ADD NTE4-CH17 0.40 0.60 37.2cents/lb+6% Free

(1806904900) COCOA PRPS NESOI NT BLK/RTL>65%SUGR ADTL NTE2-CH17 0.65 0.90 37.2cents/lb+6% Free

(1806905500) COCOA PEPS NESOI NT/BLK/RTL>10%SUGR ADDT NTE8-CH17 0.10 0.40 3.5%

(1806905900) COCOA PRPS NESOI NT BLK/RTL>10%SUGR ADD NOTE8-CH17 0.10 0.40 37.2cents/lb+6% Free

(1806909000) COCOA PREPS, NESOI, NOT FOR RETAIL, NESOI 0.10 0.40 6.0% Free

(1806909010) COCOA PREPS, NESOI, NOT FOR RETAIL, CONFECTIONERY 0.10 0.40

(1806909019) COCOA PREPS, NESOI, NOT FOR RETAIL, CONFECTIONERY 0.10 0.40

(1806909090) COCOA PREPS, NESOI, NOT FOR RETAIL, NESOI 0.10 0.40

Sources: U.S. International Trade Commission (duty rates), and Economic Research Service, USDA (sugar content coefficients).
16 Economic Research Service, USDA

Appendix table 3—HTS codes and duty rates for sugar-containing products and coefficient range for sugar

content: Chapter 19

HTS code Sugar content coefficients General Mexico

Low High duty (NAFTA)

(1901100500) PRPS INFANT USE RETAIL > 10% MLK SOLSD GEN NOTE 15 0.10 0.20 17.5% Free

(1901101500) INFNT FRMUL CNTN OLIGOSSACCHARIDES>10%MLK SLDS AD2 0.10 0.20 17.5%

(1901103000) INFANT PRPS CNTN OLIGOSACCHARIDES > 10% MILK SOLID 0.10 0.20 $1.035/kg+14.9% Free

(1901103500) PRPS INFNT RETAIL SALE>10% MLK SOLDS ADD NTE10-CH4 0.10 0.20 17.5%

(1901104000) INFANT PRPS RETAIL>10% MLK SOLDS ADDTL NOTE 1-CH4 0.10 0.20 $1.035/kg+14.9% Free

(1901104500) PREPS FOR INFANT USE RETAIL > 10% MILK SOLID NESOI 0.10 0.20 14.9% Free

(1901105500) PRPS FOR INFNT USE FOR RETAIL SALE NESOI GEN NTE15 0.10 0.20 17.5% Free

(1901106000) INFNT PRPS RETAIL CNTN OLIGOSACCHARIDES ADDTL NTE2 0.10 0.20 17.5%

(1901107500) INFNT PRPS RETAIL SALE CNTN OLIGOSACCHARIDES NESOI 0.10 0.20 $1.035/kg+14.9% Free

(1901108000) INFNT PRPS(DAIRY) RETAIL SALE ADDTL NOTE 10-CH 4 0.10 0.20 17.5%

(1901108500) PREPS INFNT USE RETAIL SALE DAIRY ADDTL NOTE1-CH4 0.10 0.20 $1.035/kg+14.9% Free

(1901109500) PREPS FOR INFANT USE, FOR RETAIL SALE, NESOI 0.10 0.20 14.9% Free

(1901200200) MIX/DOUGH OF 1905 >25% BUTRFT N/RETL, GEN NOTE 15 0.20 0.40 10.0% Free

(1901200500) MIX/DOUGH PREP>25%BUTRFT, N/RETL ADDTL NOTE 10-CH4 0.20 0.40 10.0%

(1901201500) MIX/DOUGH>25%BUTRFT,N/RETL,>65%SUGR,ADDTL NTE1-CH4 0.65 0.85 42.3cents/kg+8.5% Free

(1901202000) MIX/DOUGH>25%BUTRFAT,N/RETL,>65% SUGR AD NTE7-CH17 0.65 0.85 10.0%

(1901202500) MIXES/DOUGH OF 1905, >25% BUTRFAT N/RETAIL, NESOI 0.20 0.40 42.3cents/kg+8.5% Free

(1901203000) MIX/DOUGH OF 1905 >25% BUTRFAT N/RETL, ADDTL NOTE3 0.20 0.40 10.0%

(1901203500) MIXES/DOUGH,>25%BUTRFAT N/RETAIL,ADDTL NOTE 1-CH19 0.20 0.40 42.3cents/kg+8.5% Free

(1901204000) MIXES/DOUGH OF 1905, >25% BUTRFAT N/RETAIL, NESOI 0.20 0.40 8.5% Free

(1901204200) MIX/DOUGH FOR PREP OF 1905 NESOI, GEN NOTE 15 DRY 0.20 0.40 10.0% Free

(1901204500) MIX/DOUGH PREP OF1905,NESOI,DAIRY,ADTL NOTE 10-CH4 0.20 0.40 10.0%

(1901205000) MIX/DOUGH PREP OF 1905,DAIRY,NESOI,ADDTL NOTE1-CH4 0.20 0.40 42.3cents/kg+8.5% Free

(1901205500) MIXES/DOUGH OF 1905 NESOI,>65%SUGR,ADDTL NTE7-CH17 0.65 0.85 10.0%

(1901206000) MIXES/DOUGH 1905,>65% SUGAR,ADDTL NTE 2-CH17,NESOI 0.65 0.85 42.3cents/kg+8.5% Free

(1901206500) MIXES/DOUGH OF 1905 NESOI DRY FORM, ADDTL NOTE 3 0.20 0.40 10.0%

(1901207000) MIXES/DOUGH OF 1905, ADDTL NOTE 1 TO CHAP 19,NESOI 0.20 0.40 42.3cents/kg+8.5% Free

(1901208000) MIXES/DOUGH FOR PREP OF BAKERS WARES OF 1905 NESOI 0.20 0.40 8.5% Free

(1901901000) MALT EXTRACT, FLUID 0.10 0.20 3.2cents/liter Free

(1901902000) MALT EXTRACT, SOLID OR CONDENSED 0.10 0.20 9.6% Free

(1901902500) PUDDINGS READY TO EAT WITHOUT FURTHER PREPARATION 0.60 0.80 Free

(1901902800) DRY MIX<31%BURRFT>17.5NACAS,BUTRFT,WHEY,>5.5%.... 0.50 0.80 .37cents/kg Free

(1901903200) CAJETA NOT MADE FROM COWS MILK 0.05 0.15 11.2% Free

(1901903300) MARGARINE CHEESE: DESCRIBE IN GENERAL NOTE 15 0.05 0.15 10.0% Free

(1901903400) MARGARINE CHEESE: ADDTL US NOTE 23 TO CHAPTER 4 0.05 0.15 10.0%

(1901903600) MARGARINE CHEESE: NESOI 0.05 0.15 $1.128/kg Free

(1901903800) MALTED MILK CONTAINING > 10 % MLK SLDS GEN NOTE 15 0.40 0.65 16.0% Free

(1901904200) MALTED MLK CNTNNG >10 % MLK SLDS ADDTL NOTE 10-CH4 0.40 0.65 16.0%

(1901904300) MALTED MILK CONTAINING > 10 % MILK SOLIDS, NESOI 0.40 0.65 $1.035/kg+13.6% Free

(1901904400) MLK/CREAM PREPS CNTNG >10% MILK SOLIDS GEN NOTE 15 0.40 0.65 16.0% Free
Economic Research Service, USDA 17

Appendix table 3—HTS codes and duty rates for sugar-containing products and coefficient range for sugar

content: Chapter 19--Continued

HTS code Sugar content coefficients General Mexico

Low High duty (NAFTA)

(1901904600) MLK/CREAM PREP CNTNG>10% MLK SLDS,GEN NOTE 10-CH 4 0.40 0.65 16.0%

(1901904700) MILK/CREAM PREPS, CONTNG >10% MILK SOLIDS, NESOI 0.40 0.65 $1.035/kg+13.6% Free

(1901904800) MALTED MILK, NESOI, DESCRIBED IN GENERAL NOTE 15 0.40 0.65 10.0% Free

(1901905200) ARTICLES OF MLK/CREAM,NESOI,CNTNG ADDTL NOTE7-CH17 0.40 0.65 10.0%

(1901905400) ARTICLES MLK/CREAM,NESOI,>65%SUGR,ADDTL NOTE2-CH17 0.65 0.90 23.7cents/kg+8.5% Free

(1901905600) ARTICLES OF MILK OR CREAM, NESOI,ADDTL NOTE 8-CH17 0.40 0.65 10.0%

(1901905800) ARTICLES MLK/CREAM,NESOI,>10% SUGR ADDTL NTE3-CH17 0.10 0.40 23.7cents/kg+8.5% Free

(1901907000) FOOD PREPS >5.5% BUTRFT NT PCKGD FR RETAIL, NESOI 0.10 0.40 10.2% Free

(1901909060) FOOD PREP FLOUR/STARCH/DAIRY NESOI FR RETAIL QUOTA 0.10 0.40

(1901909082) CORN-SOYA MILK BLENDS 0.10 0.40

(1901909085) FOOD PREPS, NESOI, WHEAT-FLOUR-SOYA BLENDS 0.10 0.40

(1901909095) FOOD PREPARATIONS OF FLOUR/STARCH/DAIRY ETC, NESOI 0.10 0.40

Sources: U.S. International Trade Commission (duty rates), and Economic Research Service, USDA (sugar content coefficients).
18 Economic Research Service, USDA

Appendix table 4—HTS codes and duty rates for sugar-containing products and coefficient range for sugar

content: Chapter 21

HTS code Sugar content coefficients General Mexico

Low High duty (NAFTA)

(2101123200) PREPS BASIS OF COFFEE EXTRACT/ETC, GENERAL NOTE 15 0.05 0.10 10.0% Free

(2101123800) PREP BASIS COFFEE/EXTRCT/ETC,BLENDED SYRUPS, NESOI 0.05 0.10 30.5cents/kg+8.5% Free

(2101124800) PREPS BASIS OF COFFEE EXTRACT/ESSENCE/CONCTR NESOI 0.05 0.10 30.5cents/kg+8.5% Free

(2101125400) PREPS BASIS COFFEE EXTRCT >10% SUGAR,CH.17-NOTE 8 0.10 0.65 10.0%

(2101125800) PREPS BASIS COFFEE EXTRACT, CONTN>10% SUGAR, NESOI 0.10 0.65 30.5cents/kg+8.5% Free

(2101129000) PREPS BASIS OF COFFEE EXTRACT/ESSENCE/CONCTR NESOI 0.05 0.10 8.5% Free

(2101202000) TEA AND MATE EXTRACTS, ESSENCES AND CONCENTRATES 0.05 0.10 Free

(2101203200) PREP BASE TEA/MATE ETC,DESCRIBD IN GENERAL NOTE 15 0.05 0.10 10.0% Free

(2101203400) PREPS BASIS TEA/MATE,BLEND SYRUP,SEE CH. 17-NOTE 9 0.05 0.10 10.0%

(2101203800) PREP BASE TEA/MATE,BLEND SYRUP(CH. 17-NTE 4),NESOI 0.05 0.10 30.5cents/kg+8.5% Free

(2101204400) PREPS BASIS TEA/MATE,>65% SUGAR,SEE CH.17 - NOTE 7 0.65 0.85 10.0%

(2101204800) PREP BASE TEA/MATE ETC, CONTNG >65% SUGAR, NESOI 0.65 0.85 30.5cents/kg+8.5% Free

(2101205400) PREPS BASE TEA/MATE,>10% SUGAR,SEE NOTE 8-CHAP. 17 0.10 0.65 10.0%

(2101205800) PREP BASE TEA/MATE ETC, CONTAIN >10% SUGAR, NESOI 0.10 0.65 30.5cents/kg+8.5% Free

(2101209000) OTHER PREPARATIONS WITH A BASIS OF TEA/MATE, NESOI 0.05 0.15 8.5% Free

(2103907200) MIXED CONDIMENT/SEASONING, SEE GENERAL NOTE 15 0.30 0.50 7.5% Free

(2103907400) MIXED CONDIMENT/SEASONING,SEE U S NOTE 8(A) -CH.17 0.30 0.50 7.5%

(2103907800) MIXED CONDIMENTS/SEASONINGS (NOTE 3-CH. 21), NESOI 0.10 0.30 30.5cents/kg+6.4% Free

(2103908000) MIXED CONDIMENTS/SEASONINGS, NESOI 0.10 0.30 6.4% Free

(2105000500) ICE CREAM, DESCRIBED IN GENERAL NOTE 15 0.40 0.60 20.0% Free

(2105001000) ICE CREAM, SEE ADDTL U. S. NOTE 5 TO THIS CHAPTER 0.40 0.60 20.0%

(2105002000) ICE CREAM, WHETHER OR NOT CONTAINING COCOA, NESOI 0.40 0.60 50.2cents/kg+17% Free

(2105002500) EDIBLE ICE,DAIRY PRODUCT,DESCRBD IN GENERAL NTE 15 0.40 0.60 20.0% Free

(2105003000) EDIBLE ICE,DAIRY PRODUCT,U S ADDTL NOTE 10 -CHAP 4 0.40 0.60 20.0%

(2105004000) EDIBLE ICE, DAIRY PRODUCTS (CHAP.4-NOTE 1), NESOI 0.40 0.60 50.2cents/kg+17% Free

(2105005000) EDIBLE ICE EXCEPT ICE CREAM, NESOI 0.40 0.60 17.0% Free

(2106900300) FOOD PREP,NESOI<5.5% BFAT,>16% MLK SOLID,GNL NTE15 0.30 0.50 2.9cents/kg Free

(2106900600) FOOD PREP,<5.5% BFAT,>16% MLK SOLID,CHAP 4-NOTE 10 0.30 0.50 2.9cents/kg

(2106900900) FOOD PREPS,<5.5%BTRFAT,>16% MILK SOLIDS,BULK,NESOI 0.30 0.50 86.2cents/kg Free

(2106902200) BUTTER SUBST,>10% MILK,>45% BUTRFT,GENERAL NOTE 15 0.10 0.30 15.4cents/kg% Free

(2106902400) BUTTER SUBST,>10% MLK,>45% BUTRFT,SEE NOTE 14-CH.4 0.10 0.30 15.4cents/kg%

(2106902600) BUTTER SUBSTITUTE >10% MLK SOLID >45% BUTRFT NESOI 0.10 0.30 $1.996/kg Free

(2106902800) BUTTER SUBST, >15% BTRFAT, >10% MILK SOLIDS, NESOI 0.10 0.30 13.1cents/kg Free

(2106903200) BUTTER SUBSTITUTE,NESOI,>45% BTRFT,GENERAL NOTE 15 0.10 0.30 15.4cents/kg% Free

(2106903400) BUTTER SUBSTITUTE,NESOI,>45% BUTRFT,CH. 4- NOTE 14 0.10 0.30 15.4cents/kg%

(2106903600) BUTTER SUBSTITUTE, NESOI, >45% BUTTERFAT, NESOI 0.10 0.30 $1.996/kg Free

(2106903800) BUTTER SUBSTS LIQ/SLD OV 15% BTR/MLK FAT/OIL NESOI 0.10 0.30 13.1cents/kg Free

(2106904200) SYRUP,FROM SUGAR CANE/BEET,CONT COLR,GENERAL NTE15 0.60 0.80 3.6606cents/kg(sugar) Free

(2106904400) SYRUP,FRM SUGAR CANE/BEET,CONT COLOR,NOTE 5-CH. 17 0.60 0.80 3.6606cents/kg(sugar) Free
Economic Research Service, USDA 19

Appendix table 4—HTS codes and duty rates for sugar-containing products and coefficient range for sugar

content: Chapter 21--Continued

HTS code Sugar content coefficients General Mexico

Low High duty (NAFTA)

(2106904600) SYRUP DERV FRM CANE/BEET SUGAR COLOR/NO FLVR NESOI 0.60 0.80 35.74cents/kg 17.665

cents/kg

(sugar)

(2106905830) FOOD PREP OF GELATIN, FOR RETAIL CONT SUGAR 0.70 0.90 4.8% Free

(2106905870) FOOD PREP OF GELATIN, EX/RETAIL, CONT SUGAR 0.70 0.90 4.8% Free

(2106906200) FOOD PREPS,>10% MILK SOLID,GENERAL NOTE 15, NESOI 0.40 0.80 10.0% Free

(2106906400) FOOD PREP NESOI,>10% MILK(DAIRY) CH.4-NOTE10,NESOI 0.40 0.80 10.0%

(2106906600) FOOD PREPS NESOI,>10% MLK SOLID-DAIRY PRODCT,NESOI 0.40 0.80 70.4cents/kg+8.5% Free

(2106906800) FOOD PREP NESOI,>10% MLK,BLND SYRP,NTE9-CH17,NESOI 0.40 0.80 10.0%

(2106907200) FOOD PREPS NESOI,>10% MLK SOLID,BLEND SYRUP, NESOI 0.40 0.80 70.4cents/kg+8.5% Free

(2106907400) FOOD PREP NESOI,>10% MLK>65% SUGR,NTE 7-CH17,NESOI 0.65 0.85 10.0%

(2106907600) FOOD PREPS NESOI, >10% MILK, >65% SUGAR, NESOI 0.65 0.85 70.4cents/kg+8.5% Free

(2106907800) FOOD PREP NESOI,>10% MLK,>10% SUGR,NTE8-CH17,NESOI 0.10 0.65 10.0%

(2106908000) FOOD PREPS NESOI,>10% MILK SOLID,>10% SUGAR, NESOI 0.10 0.65 70.4cents/kg+8.5% Free

(2106908200) FOOD PREPS NESOI, >10% MILK SOLIDS, NESOI 0.10 0.20 6.4% Free

(2106908300) FOOD PREP NESOI,CONTNG 10% OR LESS MLK SOLID,NESOI 0.10 0.20 10.0% Free

(2106908500) FOOD PREP NESOI,10% OR < MLK(DAIRY)NTE10-CH4,NESOI 0.10 0.20 10.0%

(2106908700) FOOD PREP,NESOI,10% OR < MLK,OTH DAIRY PRDCT,NESOI 0.10 0.20 28.8cents/kg+8.5% Free

(2106908900) FOOD PREP NESOI,10%< MLK,BLND SYRP,NTE9-CH17,NESOI 0.40 0.60 10.0%

(2106909100) FOOD PREP,CONTNG 10% OR < MILK,BLEND SYRUP,NESOI 0.40 0.60 28.8cents/kg+8.5% Free

(2106909200) FOOD PREP NESOI,10%<MLK,>65% SUGR,NTE 7-CH17,NESOI 0.65 0.90 10.0% Free

(2106909400) FOOD PREPS, NESOI, 10% OR < MILK,>65% SUGAR, NESOI 0.65 0.90 28.8cents/kg+8.5% Free

(2106909500) FOOD PREPS NESOI,10%<MLK,>10% SUGR,NTE8-CH17,NESOI 0.10 0.65 10.0%

(2106909700) FOOD PREP, NESOI, CONTNG 10% OR LESS MILK, NESOI 0.05 0.25 28.8cents/kg+8.5% Free

(2106909972) PREPS FOR MFG BEVERAGE, NESOI, CONTAINING SUGAR 0.40 0.60 6.4% Free

(2106909973) PREPARATIONS FOR MANUFACTURE OF BEVERAGES NESOI 0.10 0.40 6.4% Free

(2106909975) COFFEE WHITENERS, NON-DAIRY, NESOI 0.50 0.70 6.4% Free

(2106909980) CREAM OR MILK SUBSTITUTES, NESOI 0.50 0.70 6.4% Free

(2106909987) HERBAL TEAS/INFUSIONS OF MIXED HERBS, NESOI 0.05 0.15 6.4% Free

(2106909990) FOOD PREPARATIONS, NESOI, CANNED 0.10 0.25 6.4% Free

(2106909995) FOOD PREPARATIONS, NESOI, FROZEN 0.10 0.25 6.4% Free

(2106909997) .FOOD PREPS NESOI CNTG SUGAR OF CANE/BEETS NT CN/F 0.50 0.70 6.4% Free

(2106909998) FOOD PREPARATIONS NESOI, NOT CANNED OR FROZEN 0.10 0.25 6.4% Free

(2106909999) FOOD PREPARATIONS NESOI, NOT CANNED OR FROZEN 0.1 0.25 6.4% Free

Sources: U.S. International Trade Commission (duty rates), and Economic Research Service, USDA (sugar content coefficients).