Connect with us
[the_ad id="89560"]

Business

Trump’s trade war and what it means for Canada

Published

2 months ago

9 minute read

From the Fraser Institute

By Jock Finlayson

We didn’t want it but it has crashed onto our shores anyway. U.S. President Donald Trump has unleashed his long-mooted assault on Canada, deploying tariffs as his chosen weapon of “economic coercion.” The Executive Order justifying 25 per cent across-the-board tariffs on southbound Canadian exports (10 per cent on exports of energy and critical minerals) cites American concerns over cross-border drug shipments. Yet that can hardly be the real reason for Trump’s unprecedented action. Canada is at most a tiny part of America’s festering problem of widespread illegal drug use. The notion that these punitive tariffs are mainly about compelling Canada to clamp down on fentanyl production is far-fetched.

It is obvious that this most unconventional of American presidents has other aims in mind. One may be to impose steep tariffs on all or most imports entering his country as a means to raise money for the cash-strapped U.S. treasury. A second may be to suck industrial production and capital out of Canada and other trading partners, to support the MAGA movement’s objective of rebuilding American manufacturing. In his remarks delivered (virtually) to the good and the great assembled at the World Economic Forum’s shindig in Davos in January, President Trump put much emphasis on this latter point. Or perhaps what the new U.S. administration most wants is to convince Canada (and other trading partners) to align with American policies to de-couple from and slow the economic and military ascent of China.

If some or all of these are indeed Mr. Trump’s most important goals, it will be difficult for Canada to negotiate our way out of the bilateral trade war. As hard as it may be to imagine, Trump’s tariffs–with the possibility of even higher levies and various other trade restrictions still to come–could be the new “normal” for Canada, at least for the duration of his presidency. For the moment, the trilateral Canada-U.S.-Mexico trade agreement is either dead or at best barely clinging to life.

As the tariff war gets underway, it is useful to look at the composition of Canada-U.S. trade. Most of it involves cross-border trade in “intermediate inputs,” not finished goods or final products (see the accompanying table). More than three-fifths of Canada’s U.S.-bound exports consist of energy, building materials, agri-food products, other raw materials, and other items used to produce final goods. Similarly, over half of all U.S. goods shipped to Canada are also made up of intermediate inputs. Capital goods (e.g., machinery and equipment) represent 16 to 23 per cent of bilateral merchandise trade. Final goods constitute between a fifth and a quarter of the total. This underscores the highly integrated nature of North American supply chains–and the significant disruptions that two-way tariffs will cause for many industries operating on both sides of the border.

Composition of Canada-U.S. Merchandise Trade, 2023 (% of total exports)
Canadian exports to the U.S. U.S. exports to Canada
Final goods 21% 25%
Capital goods* 16% 23%
Intermediate inputs 63% 52%

*e.g., machinery and equipment
Source: Canadian Chamber of Commerce, Data Lab.

Looking ahead, it’s clear our economy is about to suffer, as Canadian industries, workers and communities absorb the biggest external shock in a century (apart from during the initial phases of the COVID pandemic). To see why, recall that the U.S. buys more than three-quarters of Canada’s international exports, with the value of our U.S.-destined shipments amounting to about one-fifth of Canada’s GDP.

According to projections published by the Bank of Canada, 25 per cent U.S. tariffs coupled with Canadian retaliatory tariffs will reduce the level of Canadian real GDP by at least 3 per cent over 2025-26–this represents a permanent output loss, meaning it is national income we will never recoup. Business fixed non-residential investment falls by 12 per cent, with exports dropping by nine per cent. Unemployment rises significantly and job creation downshifts. Consumer spending also weakens–in part because retaliatory Canadian tariffs raise the cost of many consumer goods, thus leading to a temporary bump in Canadian inflation. All of these estimates are measured relative to a counterfactual baseline scenario of no U.S. and Canadian tariffs. The U.S. economy will also take a hit from President Trump’s tariffs, notably through higher inflation, increased business uncertainty, and the costs of rejigging the supply chains of American companies that rely significantly on raw materials, other inputs and consumer goods supplied by Canada and Mexico.

How should Canada respond to the American tariffs? An initial priority is to determine if there is a pathway to a negotiated settlement–not a simple task, as the Americans have yet to specify what it would take to make peace. A second option is to hit back. Canada has already announced a schedule for retaliatory tariffs, covering some $155 billion of goods imported from the United States; all of these are slated to be in place by the end of March. While the political impulse and pressure to respond in kind is understandable, retaliation will magnify the economic damage to Canada from the U.S. tariffs. Finding a way to end the conflict–if that is possible–is far superior to a series of tit-for-tat bilateral tariffs.

Some politicians and media commentators have talked up “trade diversification” as an option for Canada. Reduced reliance on the U.S. would likely deliver benefits in the long-term, but it won’t help us in 2025/26. Despite entering into 15 trade agreements with 51 nations (other than the U.S.), Canada has seen virtually no export market diversification in the last two decades. There has been modest diversification on the import side of the trade ledger, mainly due to the growing importance of China and other Asian emerging markets as suppliers of final goods and some intermediate inputs. But the U.S. remains the source of more than half of Canada’s imports of goods and services combined. Moreover, “gravity models” of international trade confirm that Canada’s dense, extensive web of trade and other commercial ties with the United States makes perfect economic sense given the advantages of geographic proximity, a common language, and similar business practices between the two countries.

The Trump administration’s self-chosen trade war is a watershed moment for Canadian foreign and commercial policy. The shock from this U.S. action will persist, even if the tariffs are in place for only a few months. Treating an ally as an enemy is an abnormal practice in the history of Western diplomacy. But with Donald Trump at the helm, the past is no longer a reliable guide to understanding or forecasting American policy.

Related Topics:

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

More from this author
Business / 2 hours ago

Trump demands free passage for American ships through Panama, Suez

International / 2 hours ago

U.S. Army names new long-range hypersonic weapon ‘Dark Eagle’

2025 Federal Election / 6 hours ago

Canada is squandering the greatest oil opportunity on Earth

Business

Trump demands free passage for American ships through Panama, Suez

Published on April 28, 2025

By

MXM logo MxM News

Quick Hit:

President Donald Trump is pushing for U.S. ships to transit the Panama and Suez canals without paying tolls, arguing the waterways would not exist without America.

Key Details:

  • In a Saturday Truth Social post, Trump said, “American Ships, both Military and Commercial, should be allowed to travel, free of charge, through the Panama and Suez Canals! Those Canals would not exist without the United States of America.”

  • Trump directed Secretary of State Marco Rubio to “immediately take care of, and memorialize” the issue, signaling a potential new diplomatic initiative with Panama and Egypt.

  • The Panama Canal generated about $3.3 billion in toll revenue in fiscal 2023, while the Suez Canal posted a record $9.4 billion. U.S. vessels account for roughly 70% of Panama Canal traffic, according to government figures.

Diving Deeper:

President Donald Trump is pressing for American ships to receive free passage through two of the world’s most critical shipping lanes—the Panama and Suez canals—a move he argues would recognize the United States’ historic role in making both waterways possible. In a post shared Saturday on Truth Social, Trump wrote, “American Ships, both Military and Commercial, should be allowed to travel, free of charge, through the Panama and Suez Canals! Those Canals would not exist without the United States of America.”

Trump added that he has instructed Secretary of State Marco Rubio to “immediately take care of, and memorialize” the situation. His comments, first reported by FactSet, come as U.S. companies face rising shipping costs, with tolls for major vessels ranging from $200,000 to over $500,000 per Panama Canal crossing, based on canal authority schedules.

The Suez Canal, operated by Egypt, reportedly saw record revenues of $9.4 billion in 2023, largely driven by American and European shipping amid ongoing Red Sea instability. After a surge in attacks by Houthi militants on commercial ships earlier this year, Trump authorized a sustained military campaign targeting missile and drone sites in northern Yemen. The Pentagon said the strikes were part of an effort to “permanently restore freedom of navigation” for global shipping near the Suez Canal.

Trump has framed the military operations as part of a broader strategy to counter Iranian-backed destabilization efforts across the Middle East.

Meanwhile, in Central America, Trump’s administration is working to counter Chinese influence near the Panama Canal. On April 9th, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth announced an expanded partnership with Panama to bolster canal security, including a memorandum of understanding allowing U.S. warships and support vessels to move “first and free” through the canal. “The Panama Canal is key terrain that must be secured by Panama, with America, and not China,” Hegseth emphasized during a press conference in Panama City.

American commercial shipping has long depended on the canal, which reduces the shipping route between the U.S. East Coast and Asia by nearly 8,000 miles. About 40% of all U.S. container traffic uses the Panama Canal annually, according to the U.S. Maritime Administration.

The United States originally constructed and controlled the Panama Canal following a monumental effort championed by President Theodore Roosevelt in the early 20th century. After backing Panama’s independence from Colombia in 1903, the U.S. secured the rights to build and operate the canal, which opened in 1914. Although U.S. control ended in 1999 under the Torrijos-Carter Treaties, the canal remains vital to U.S. trade.

Continue Reading

2025 Federal Election

Columnist warns Carney Liberals will consider a home equity tax on primary residences

Published on April 27, 2025

By

From LifeSiteNews

By Steve Jalsevac

The Liberals paid a group called Generation Squeeze, led by activist Paul Kershaw, to study how the government could tap into Canadians’ home equity — including their primary residences.

Winnipeg Sun Columnist Kevin Klein is sounding the alarm there is substantial evidence the Carney Liberal Party is considering implementing a home equity tax on Canadians’ primary residences as a potential huge source of funds to bring down the massive national debt their spending created.

Klein wrote in his April 23 column and stated in his accompanying video presentation:

The Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (CMHC) — a federal Crown corporation — has investigated the possibility of a home equity tax on more than one occasion, using taxpayer dollars to fund that research. This was not backroom speculation. It was real, documented work.

The Liberals paid a group called Generation Squeeze, led by activist Paul Kershaw, to study how the government could tap into Canadians’ home equity — including their primary residences.

Kershaw, by the way, believes homeowners are “lottery winners” who didn’t earn their wealth but lucked into it. That’s the ideology being advanced to the highest levels of government.

It didn’t stop there. These proposals were presented directly to federal cabinet ministers. That’s on record, and most of those same ministers are now part of Mark Carney’s team as he positions himself as the Liberals’ next leader.

Watch below Klein’s 7-minute, impassionate warning to Canadians about this looming major new tax should the Liberals win Monday’s election.

Klein further adds:

The total home equity held by Canadians is over $4.7 trillion. It’s the largest pool of private wealth in the country. For millions of Canadians — especially baby boomers — it’s the only retirement fund they have. They don’t have big pensions. They have a paid-off house and a hope that it will carry them through their later years. Yet, that’s what Ottawa has quietly been circling.

The Canadian Taxpayer’s Federation has researched this issue and published a report on the alarming amount of new taxation a homeowner equity tax could cost Canadians who sell their homes that have increased in value over the years they have lived in it. It is a shocker!

A Google search on the question, “what is a home equity tax?” returns the response:

A home equity tax, simply put, it’s a proposed levy on the increased value of your home, specifically, on your principal residence. The idea is for Government to raise money by taxing wealth accumulation from rising property values.

The Canadian Taxpayers Federation has provided a Home Equity Tax Calculator Backgrounder to help Canadians understand what the impact of three different types of Home Equity Tax Calculators would have on home owners. The required tax payment resulting from all three is a shocker.

Keep in mind that World Economic Forum policies intend to eventually eliminate all private home ownership and have the state own and control not only all residences, but also eliminate car ownership, and control when and where you may live and travel.

Featured Image
Steve is the co-founder and managing director of LifeSiteNews.com.
Continue Reading

Trending

X