Thursday, September 03, 2026

BEA NEWS: The U.S. goods and services trade deficit increased in July 2026 according to the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis and the U.S. Census Bureau.

US Department of Commerce Bureau of Economic Analysis

BEA News: U.S. International Trade in Goods and Services, July 2026

The U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA) has issued the following news release today:

The U.S. goods and services trade deficit increased in July 2026 according to the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis and the U.S. Census Bureau.

The deficit increased from $71.2 billion in June (revised) to $88.6 billion in July, as imports increased and exports decreased.
The goods deficit increased $17.6 billion in July to $119.6 billion.

The services surplus increased $0.2 billion in July to $31.0 billion.

The full text of the release can be found at www.bea.gov/news/2026/us-international-trade-goods-and-services-july-2026.

EMBARGOED UNTIL RELEASE AT 8:30 a.m. EDT, Thursday, September 3, 2026

BEA 26–40
CB 26–142

U.S. International Trade in Goods and Services, July 2026

The U.S. Census Bureau and the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis announced today that the goods and services deficit was $88.6 billion in July, up $17.4 billion from $71.2 billion in June, revised.

**U.S. International Trade in Goods and Services Deficit**
Deficit:	$88.6 Billion	+24.4%°
Exports:	$310.7 Billion	–2.1%°
Imports:	$399.3 Billion	+2.8%°
Next release: Tuesday, October 6, 2026 (°) Statistical significance is not applicable or not measurable. Data adjusted for seasonality but not price changes Source: U.S. Census Bureau, U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis; U.S. International Trade in Goods and Services, September 3, 2026

Goods and Services Trade Deficit: Seasonally adjusted

Exports, Imports, and Balance (exhibit 1)

July exports were $310.7 billion, $6.6 billion less than June exports. July imports were $399.3 billion, $10.8 billion more than June imports.

The July increase in the goods and services deficit reflected an increase in the goods deficit of $17.6 billion to $119.6 billion and an increase in the services surplus of $0.2 billion to $31.0 billion.

Year-to-date, the goods and services deficit decreased $188.4 billion, or 29.6 percent, from the same period in 2025. Exports increased $237.2 billion or 12.0 percent. Imports increased $48.8 billion or 1.9 percent.

Three-Month Moving Averages (exhibit 2)

The average goods and services deficit increased $11.9 billion to $78.5 billion for the three months ending in July.

Average exports decreased $6.4 billion to $316.0 billion in July.
Average imports increased $5.5 billion to $394.5 billion in July.

Year-over-year, the average goods and services deficit increased $11.7 billion from the three months ending in July 2025.

Average exports increased $33.5 billion from July 2025.
Average imports increased $45.2 billion from July 2025.

Exports (exhibits 3, 6, and 7)

Exports of goods decreased $6.2 billion to $201.0 billion in July.

Exports of goods on a Census basis decreased $5.9 billion.

Industrial supplies and materials decreased $8.7 billion.
- Crude oil decreased $4.5 billion.
- Nonmonetary gold decreased $3.9 billion.
Capital goods increased $1.9 billion.
Consumer goods increased $1.7 billion.
- Pharmaceutical preparations increased $1.0 billion.

Net balance of payments adjustments decreased $0.3 billion.

Treatment of Gold in BEA’s International and National Economic Accounts

When incorporating the statistics in this release into BEA’s National Economic Accounts, including Gross Domestic Product, or GDP, BEA replaces exports and imports of nonmonetary gold with an adjustment calculated as the difference between domestic production and industrial use of gold. For additional information, see “How are exports and imports of gold recorded in BEA’s International Economic Accounts?” and “How are exports and imports of nonmonetary gold treated in BEA’s National Economic Accounts?”.

Exports of services decreased $0.4 billion to $109.7 billion in July.

Travel decreased $0.6 billion.
Financial services decreased $0.3 billion.
Transport decreased $0.2 billion.
Charges for the use of intellectual property increased $0.4 billion.
Other business services increased $0.2 billion.

Imports (exhibits 4, 6, and 8)

Imports of goods increased $11.4 billion to $320.6 billion in July.

Imports of goods on a Census basis increased $12.0 billion.

Capital goods increased $14.4 billion.
- Computers increased $6.9 billion.
- Computer accessories increased $6.6 billion.
- Semiconductors increased $1.2 billion.
Industrial supplies and materials decreased $1.8 billion.
- Crude oil decreased $1.8 billion.

Net balance of payments adjustments decreased $0.6 billion.

Imports of services decreased $0.6 billion to $78.7 billion in July.

Charges for the use of intellectual property decreased $0.5 billion.
Transport decreased $0.3 billion.
Travel increased $0.2 billion.

Real Goods in 2017 Dollars – Census Basis (exhibit 11)

The real goods deficit increased $12.0 billion, or 12.7 percent, to $106.4 billion in July, compared to a 17.7 percent increase in the nominal deficit.

Real exports of goods decreased $2.7 billion, or 1.8 percent, to $150.8 billion, compared to a 2.9 percent decrease in nominal exports.
Real imports of goods increased $9.3 billion, or 3.8 percent, to $257.2 billion, compared to a 3.9 percent increase in nominal imports.

Revisions

Exports and imports of goods and services were revised for January through June 2026 to incorporate more comprehensive and updated quarterly and monthly data.

Revisions to June exports

Exports of goods were revised up $0.3 billion.
Exports of services were revised up $2.3 billion.

Revisions to June imports

Imports of goods were revised up $0.2 billion.
Imports of services were revised up $0.3 billion.

Goods by Selected Countries and Areas: Monthly – Census Basis (exhibit 19)

The July figures show surpluses, in billions of dollars, with Netherlands ($7.8), South and Central America ($6.6), Hong Kong ($3.1), United Kingdom ($2.5), Brazil ($2.4), Singapore ($1.9), Saudi Arabia ($1.3), Australia ($1.2), and Belgium ($0.9). Deficits were recorded, in billions of dollars, with Mexico ($27.5), Vietnam ($23.3), Taiwan ($18.1), China ($15.2), South Korea ($10.4), European Union ($8.9), Germany ($5.6), India ($5.0), Malaysia ($4.8), Japan ($4.2), Ireland ($3.9), Canada ($3.2), Italy ($2.5), France ($1.3), Switzerland ($0.6), and Israel ($0.5).

The deficit with Mexico increased $7.2 billion to $27.5 billion in July. Exports decreased $0.2 billion to $32.6 billion and imports increased $7.0 billion to $60.1 billion.
The balance with Switzerland shifted from a surplus of $2.9 billion in June to a deficit of $0.6 billion in July. Exports decreased $2.0 billion to $4.4 billion and imports increased $1.5 billion to $5.0 billion.
The deficit with Canada decreased $3.7 billion to $3.2 billion in July. Exports increased $0.5 billion to $29.3 billion and imports decreased $3.3 billion to $32.5 billion.

Goods and Services by Selected Countries and Areas: Quarterly – Balance of Payments Basis(exhibit 20)

Statistics on trade in goods and services by country and area are only available quarterly, with a one-month lag. With this release, second-quarter figures are now available.

The second-quarter figures show surpluses, in billions of dollars, with Netherlands ($29.6), South and Central America ($21.7), Singapore ($15.9), Hong Kong ($15.1), Brazil ($12.7), Ireland ($12.1), Switzerland ($10.6), Australia ($9.3), United Kingdom ($9.1), Saudi Arabia ($4.7), Belgium ($3.2), and European Union ($2.0). Deficits were recorded, in billions of dollars, with Vietnam ($61.2), Taiwan ($53.1), Mexico ($52.7), China ($32.3), Germany ($19.2), South Korea ($14.6), Canada ($13.7), India ($12.2), Malaysia ($11.4), Italy ($9.7), France ($6.3), Japan ($4.9), and Israel ($1.5).

The surplus with the United Kingdom decreased $13.3 billion to $9.1 billion in the second quarter. Exports decreased $12.6 billion to $52.2 billion and imports increased $0.7 billion to $43.1 billion.
The deficit with Canada increased $11.9 billion to $13.7 billion in the second quarter. Exports increased $2.1 billion to $111.9 billion and imports increased $13.9 billion to $125.6 billion.
The surplus with South and Central America increased $6.2 billion to $21.7 billion in the second quarter. Exports increased $9.1 billion to $110.4 billion and imports increased $2.9 billion to $88.7 billion.

All statistics referenced are seasonally adjusted; statistics are on a balance of payments basis unless otherwise specified. Additional statistics, including not seasonally adjusted statistics and details for goods on a Census basis, are available in exhibits 1-20b of this release. For information on data sources, definitions, and revision procedures, see the explanatory notes in this release. The full release can be found at www.census.gov/foreign-trade/Press-Release/current_press_release/index.html or www.bea.gov/data/intl-trade-investment/international-trade-goods-and-services. The full schedule is available in the Census Bureau’s Economic Briefing Room at www.census.gov/economic-indicators/ or on BEA’s website at www.bea.gov/news/schedule.

Next release: October 6, 2026
U.S. International Trade in Goods and Services, August 2026

Blog Threat Research: INSIDE THE HUGGING FACE BREACh | Blog Threat Researcharois

The Hugging Face breach is a preview of the next phase of security. Autonomous attackers probing shared AI infrastructure, and defenders who win or lose based on whether their own AI is ready to fight back in real time.

A Look Inside the Hugging Face Breach

Explore the HuggingFace security breach involving an autonomous AI attacker and learn essential strategies to protect your org from similar threats.

Varonis Threat Labs

6 min read

Last updated August 6, 2026

Key takeaways

On July 16, 2026, Hugging Face disclosed a security breach in which an autonomous AI attacker infiltrated its internal infrastructure.
The attacker chained two remote code execution (RCE) vulnerabilities in Hugging Face's dataset processing pipeline, leaked cloud and cluster credentials, moved laterally into internal clusters, and even generated decoy activity to slow investigators down.
Hugging Face caught it with its own AI: an anomaly-detection pipeline that uses LLM-based triage to correlate security telemetry. Attacker AI versus defender AI.
To investigate, Hugging Face moved to deploy an open-weight LLM on its own infrastructure because foundation-model guardrails refused to process the malicious payloads pulled from its logs.
What to do now: Rotate API access tokens, apply least privilege to AI workloads, treat downloaded models and datasets as untrusted code, and hunt for reconnaissance fingerprints inside your ML pipelines.

AI vs AI

For years, "AI security" meant defenders using machine learning to chase human attackers. The Hugging Face breach flips that script. This is one of the first public incidents where an autonomous AI attacker went head-to-head with an AI-driven defender, and both were moving at machine speed.

The attacker chained together classic vulnerabilities and drove them autonomously, compressing a weeks-long campaign into seconds. The defender answered with AI of its own. In the middle of that fight, Hugging Face hit a wall that every security team should think hard about: one that has nothing to do with how much talent or tooling you have, and everything to do with whether the AI on your side is allowed to help.

The attack chain is precise, reproducible, and targeted at the infrastructure that thousands of organizations rely on every day. It's worth understanding in detail.

What happened

Hugging Face recently disclosed that an autonomous AI attacker had infiltrated its internal infrastructure. A limited set of internal datasets were accessed, and several service credentials were leaked. The attacker didn't just smash and grab; it generated decoy activity designed to hide real impact in noise and stall the investigation.

Hugging Face's AI-assisted threat detection system flagged a compromise in its cloud infrastructure. HuggingFace ran LLM-driven analysis agents over the logs to extract indicators of compromise (IOCs) and separate genuine attacker impact from the decoy actions.

Hugging Face contained the attack, fixed the vulnerability that enabled initial access, and removed the attacker's foothold from the affected infrastructure. It's recommended that users rotate API access tokens and report any unusual account activity.

The how is where this incident stops being routine.

What we know so far

Once Hugging Face's analysis agents worked through the logs, the attack was attributed to an autonomous AI attack that exploited two remote code execution vulnerabilities in the dataset processing pipeline.

Remote-code dataset loader: ML datasets frequently ship with custom loading scripts that run automatically when the dataset is ingested. The attacker abused Hugging Face's remote-code loader to execute its own code, turning a routine ingestion step into arbitrary execution.
Template injection in a dataset configuration: The attacker injected a malicious configuration into a dataset config file. When the platform processed that file, it executed an attacker-controlled payload.

From that initial foothold, the attack escalated:

The attacker's framework operated as a distributed command-and-control (C2) environment, leveraging dynamic, short-lived endpoints.
It exfiltrated cloud and cluster credentials and moved laterally into several internal clusters.
It generated decoy activity to complicate attribution and impact analysis.

ANGEL ROBLES LIVE MUSIC TONIGHT: 8-11PM in Fountain Hills | SKYBOX Ultra Sports Lounge

ANGEL ROBLES is known for an eclectic set list that spans multiple genres, . .

He utilizes loop pedals, acoustic guitars, and backing rhythms to create the full sound of a complete group entirely on his own.

Notable Regular Venues

If you are looking to catch one of his live performances in the Arizona area, he frequently plays recurring local gigs: [1, 2]

Singing Pandas Asian Restaurant & Bar: Located in Chandler, AZ, where he traditionally plays a recurring "One Man Band" set.
Orange Tree Golf Resort / Resort: Located in Scottsdale, AZ, where he regularly films and hosts live music covers.
D'Vine Bistro & Wine Bar: Located in Mesa, AZ, where he has been featured for evening sets and patio brunch sessions.
Red Mountain Country Club and Golf Course in Mesa, AZ
Pier 54 Restaurant in Lakeshore Villages in Tempe
Mad Hatter KAVA in Gilbert
Private events for all ages