DATA EXPLAINER · 1 October 2026 release
The EU’s coffee import bill more than doubled between 2015 and 2025, while imported tonnage rose much less. Dividing import value by weight suggests the average value per kilogram roughly doubled. That is an implied trade unit value, not a same-quality coffee price index or a measure of café inflation.
Eurostat reports 2.9 million tonnes imported from outside the EU in 2025, worth €18.7 billion. The corresponding rounded 2015 figures are 2.7 million tonnes and €8.6 billion. A useful reading separates three questions: how much coffee crossed the border, how much the imports were worth, and how the composition of that coffee might differ.
One bill, two moving parts
| Measure | 2015 | 2025 |
|---|---|---|
| Import weight | 2.7m tonnes | 2.9m tonnes |
| Import value | €8.6bn | €18.7bn |
| Implied value per kg | About €3.19 | About €6.45 |
A million tonnes equals a billion kilograms. The unit conversion therefore makes the division particularly simple: €8.6 billion divided by 2.7 billion kilograms is about €3.19 per kilogram. Repeating the exercise for 2025 gives about €6.45. Calculate with the source figures before rounding the final answer; dividing the displayed two-decimal values introduces another small rounding difference.
Why an average can rise without identical products doubling
Imagine a shipment containing basic and premium coffee. If the share of premium coffee increases, the shipment’s average value per kilogram can rise even when each product’s individual price stays unchanged. Changes in processing, origin and product quality can therefore affect the aggregate unit value alongside changes in like-for-like prices.
The release’s trade coverage includes roasted and unroasted coffee, decaffeinated categories and an “other” category. This mixed basket is a reason to avoid calling the calculated result the price of a standard kilogram of beans. The calculation also cannot isolate exchange-rate effects or determine how much of the change eventually reached a consumer.
Try the volume-only counterfactual
Hold the 2015 implied unit value fixed and increase volume to 2.9 million tonnes. The illustrative bill is €8.6bn × 2.9 ÷ 2.7, or about €9.24bn. That is far below the reported €18.7bn.
The roughly €9.46bn difference reflects the higher aggregate unit value in this chosen calculation. It is not a pure inflation estimate: product mix and other valuation differences remain inside that unit value. Changing the order of a value decomposition also changes how its interaction term is allocated.
Test a smaller purchasing scenario
Suppose a buyer purchases 10% more coffee and the average amount paid per kilogram rises 20%. The new bill is 1.10 × 1.20 = 1.32 times the old bill, a 32% increase. Adding 10% and 20% misses the extra 2% paid because the higher unit value applies to the extra volume too.
If volume instead falls 10% while unit value rises 20%, the bill becomes 0.90 × 1.20 = 1.08 times the original: an 8% increase despite fewer kilograms. These are examples, not forecasts.
A practical checklist for the next headline
First identify the border and period: these are annual extra-EU imports, not all coffee sold within Europe. Next check whether the measure is money or weight. Then inspect product coverage before comparing a unit value with a retail shelf price or commodity quotation.
Finally, keep production and trade totals separate. Adding the value of imported inputs to the value of processed output can count parts of the same supply chain twice. This release supports a clear conclusion about the import bill’s arithmetic. It does not establish that Europeans drank twice as much coffee, or that every coffee business experienced the same cost increase.
Sources and method
Source: Eurostat, Import value of coffee more than doubled in a decade, released 1 October 2026; accessed 9 October 2026 (Korea time). Figures are reproduced from the release, not a fresh extraction of its underlying datasets. Calculations, examples and graphics are original adaptations; Eurostat is not responsible for this analysis. Eurostat reuse terms. No source photographs, logos or charts are reproduced.
