Business
Federal carbon tax a hot issue today

From Resource Works
When it comes to Canada and carbon taxes, times have certainly changed in very little time.
We had wondered how long Ottawa’s national carbon-tax system would last when, after implementing it as a mandatory national scheme, the feds suddenly announced an exemption for home heating oil in Newfoundland and Labrador.
Pressed by NL Premier Andrew Furey, a Liberal, and Liberal MP Ken McDonald, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau announced the exemption last October, saying it would help Atlantic Canadians with the cost of living.
The exemption would last until March 31, 2027. And for NL households that burn oil, the feds said it would mean an average $250 annual savings.
Alberta and Saskatchewan saw the exemption as unmitigated vote-buying politics, and they weren’t alone.
On Jan. 1, 2024, Saskatchewan stopped collecting the federal carbon tax on natural gas used for home heating in that province. Premier Scott Moe declared that this was in response to Ottawa’s “unfair” exemption for Newfoundland and Labrador.
“Trudeau has provided a carbon tax exemption on home heating for families in one part of the country, but not here. It’s unfair, it’s unacceptable.”
Saskatchewan went on to challenge the exemption, in federal court, on constitutional grounds, and won a temporary injunction. Later, pending a final court decision, Saskatchewan and Ottawa agreed that the province would be responsible for “50 percent of the outstanding tax amounts.”
But Ottawa’s carbon tax (oops, sorry, Ottawa likes to call it “carbon pricing” and “carbon pollution pricing”) has now run into new political trouble.
First, national NDP leader Jagmeet Singh, who had voted for the carbon tax, pulled out of a deal supporting Trudeau’s Liberal Party in government.
Singh then went on to slam Trudeau’s approach of exempting fuels in favored geography. And he said the NDP would come up with a system that doesn’t “put the burden on the backs of working people.”
Then, British Columbia Premier David Eby, long a strong supporter of the carbon tax — but facing an election on Oct. 19 — suddenly declared: “I think it’s critical to also recognize that the context and the challenge for British Columbians have changed. A lot of British Columbians are struggling with affordability.
“If the federal government decides to remove the legal backstop requiring us to have a consumer carbon tax in British Columbia, we will end the consumer carbon tax in British Columbia.”
Would Prime Minister Trudeau remove the backstop requirement?
Apparently not. Instead, Environment and Climate Change Canada is looking to run a $7-million “climate literacy and action” advertising campaign to promote the carbon tax and the quarterly rebates that many Canadians receive under it.
And the prime minister, earlier this year, declined to meet the premiers of Alberta, Ontario, Saskatchewan, New Brunswick, and Newfoundland and Labrador on the issue.
“The carbon tax has contributed to increasing stress and financial pain for millions of Canadians,” Alberta Premier Danielle Smith wrote to the prime minister.
Ontario Premier Doug Ford wrote: “While we all have a role in protecting the environment, it cannot be done on the backs of hardworking people.”
But Trudeau turned down the call for a meeting: “We had a meeting on carbon pricing and every single premier came together to work on establishing a pan-Canadian framework on climate change years ago.
“And part of it was that there would be a federal backstop to make sure that pollution wasn’t free anywhere across the country.”
Whether the carbon tax has “worked” or not to reduce pollution is an open question. Supporters say yes. Opponents say no.
A poll late last year found that Canadians were feeling slightly more confident in the carbon tax’s effectiveness at combating climate change — but uncertainty was still high.
But the Liberal government is already getting a message from voters — having lost in two recent by-elections in Manitoba and Quebec, and in an earlier one in a “safe seat” in Ontario (Toronto-St. Paul’s).
In the Quebec one on Monday, the Liberals lost their longtime safe seat of LaSalle—Émard—Verdun to the NDP, by just over 200 votes. It had been a Liberal stronghold for years, won by more than 20 percent of the vote in previous campaigns.
The next federal election will take place on or before October 2025, and Trudeau’s opponents have already been loudly cranking up “Axe the Tax” campaigns.
And that means the carbon tax.
Business
Trump confirms 35% tariff on Canada, warns more could come

Quick Hit:
President Trump on Thursday confirmed a sweeping new 35% tariff on Canadian imports starting August 1, citing Canada’s failure to curb fentanyl trafficking and retaliatory trade actions.
Key Details:
- In a letter to Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney, Trump said the new 35% levy is in response to Canada’s “financial retaliation” and its inability to stop fentanyl from reaching the U.S.
- Trump emphasized that Canadian businesses that relocate manufacturing to the U.S. will be exempt and promised expedited approvals for such moves.
- The administration has already notified 23 countries of impending tariffs following the expiration of a 90-day negotiation window under Trump’s “Liberation Day” trade policy.
Diving Deeper:
President Trump escalated his tariff strategy on Thursday, formally announcing a 35% duty on all Canadian imports effective August 1. The move follows what Trump described as a breakdown in trade cooperation and a failure by Canada to address its role in the U.S. fentanyl crisis.
“It is a Great Honor for me to send you this letter in that it demonstrates the strength and commitment of our Trading Relationship,” Trump wrote to Prime Minister Mark Carney. He added that the tariff response comes after Canada “financially retaliated” against the U.S. rather than working to resolve the flow of fentanyl across the northern border.
Trump’s letter made clear the tariff will apply broadly, separate from any existing sector-specific levies, and included a warning that “goods transshipped to evade this higher Tariff will be subject to that higher Tariff.” The president also hinted that further retaliation from Canada could push rates even higher.
However, Trump left the door open for possible revisions. “If Canada works with me to stop the flow of Fentanyl, we will, perhaps, consider an adjustment to this letter,” he said, adding that tariffs “may be modified, upward or downward, depending on our relationship.”
Canadian companies that move operations to the U.S. would be exempt, Trump said, noting his administration “will do everything possible to get approvals quickly, professionally, and routinely — In other words, in a matter of weeks.”
The U.S. traded over $762 billion in goods with Canada in 2024, with a trade deficit of $63.3 billion, a figure Trump called a “major threat” to both the economy and national security.
Speaking with NBC News on Thursday, Trump suggested even broader tariff hikes are coming, floating the idea of a 15% or 20% blanket rate on all imports. “We’re just going to say all of the remaining countries are going to pay,” he told Meet the Press moderator Kristen Welker, adding that “the tariffs have been very well-received” and noting that the stock market had hit new highs that day.
The Canadian announcement is part of a broader global tariff rollout. In recent days, Trump has notified at least 23 countries of new levies and revealed a separate 50% tariff on copper imports.
“Not everybody has to get a letter,” Trump said when asked if other leaders would be formally notified. “You know that. We’re just setting our tariffs.”
Business
Trump slaps Brazil with tariffs over social media censorship

From LifeSiteNews
By Dan Frieth
In his letter dated July 9, 2025, addressed to President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, Trump ties new U.S. trade measures directly to Brazilian censorship.
U.S. President Donald Trump has launched a fierce rebuke of Brazil’s moves to silence American-run social media platforms, particularly Rumble and X.
In his letter dated July 9, 2025, addressed to President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, Trump ties new U.S. trade measures directly to Brazilian censorship.
He calls attention to “SECRET and UNLAWFUL Censorship Orders to U.S. Social Media platforms,” pointing out that Brazil’s Supreme Court has been “threatening them with Millions of Dollars in Fines and Eviction from the Brazilian Social Media market.”
Trump warns that these actions are “due in part to Brazil’s insidious attacks on Free Elections, and the fundamental Free Speech Rights of Americans,” and states: “starting on August 1, 2025, we will charge Brazil a Tariff of 50% on any and all Brazilian products sent into the United States, separate from all Sectoral Tariffs.” He also adds that “Goods transshipped to evade this 50% Tariff will be subject to that higher Tariff.”
Brazil’s crackdown has targeted Rumble after it refused to comply with orders to block the account of Allan dos Santos, a Brazilian streamer living in the United States.
On February 21, 2025, Justice Alexandre de Moraes ordered Rumble’s suspension for non‑compliance, saying it failed “to comply with court orders.”
Earlier, from August to October 2024, Moraes had similarly ordered a nationwide block on X.
The court directed ISPs to suspend access and imposed fines after the platform refused to designate a legal representative and remove certain accounts.
Elon Musk responded: “Free speech is the bedrock of democracy and an unelected pseudo‑judge in Brazil is destroying it for political purposes.”
By linking censorship actions, particularly those targeting Rumble and X, to U.S. trade policy, Trump’s letter asserts that Brazil’s judiciary has moved into the arena of foreign policy and economic consequences.
The tariffs, he makes clear, are meant, at least in part, as a response to Brazil’s suppression of American free speech.
Trump’s decision to impose tariffs on Brazil for censoring American platforms may also serve as a clear signal to the European Union, which is advancing similar regulatory efforts under the guise of “disinformation” and “online safety.”
With the EU’s Digital Services Act and proposed “hate speech” legislation expanding government authority over content moderation, American companies face mounting pressure to comply with vague and sweeping takedown demands.
By framing censorship as a violation of U.S. free speech rights and linking it to trade consequences, Trump is effectively warning that any foreign attempt to suppress American voices or platforms could trigger similar economic retaliation.
Reprinted with permission from Reclaim The Net.
-
International2 days ago
Secret Service suspends six agents nearly a year after Trump assassination attempt
-
Bruce Dowbiggin2 days ago
The Covid 19 Disaster: When Do We Get The Apologies?
-
Crime1 day ago
Sweeping Boston Indictment Points to Vast Chinese Narco-Smuggling and Illegal Alien Labor Plot via Mexican Border
-
Alberta1 day ago
Alberta school boards required to meet new standards for school library materials with regard to sexual content
-
Business14 hours ago
Trump slaps Brazil with tariffs over social media censorship
-
Environment1 day ago
EPA releases report on chemtrails, climate manipulation
-
Business2 days ago
‘Experts’ Warned Free Markets Would Ruin Argentina — Looks Like They Were Dead Wrong
-
International14 hours ago
Support for the Ukraine war continues because no one elected is actually in charge.