- Canada has responded to U.S. tariffs with sweeping duties on products including cheese and steel.
- The Midwest and Great Lakes are among the most exposed regions, led by Ohio ($2.3 billion) and Illinois ($2.1 billion).
- Several of the most affected states, including Michigan and Wisconsin, are politically important swing states.
…
The goal is to stop trade. It doesn’t matter who it hurts.
No - the goal is to have an enduring and stable trading relationship.
The USA and Canada have an existing trade agreement called CUSMA (aka ACEUM, T-MEC or USMCA https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States–Mexico–Canada_Agreement ) which supersedes the earlier NAFTA trade treaty. It was negotiated and signed during the Trump 1.0 administration who at the time said:
Once approved by Congress, this new deal will be the most modern, up-to-date, and balanced trade agreement in the history of our country, with the most advanced protections for workers ever developed.
Since then during the Trump 2.0 admin the USA has broken this existing treaty and there’s been ongoing tariffs and other trade actions (restrictions on alcohol imports from the USA by most Provinces) for over a year. The latest round of USA tariffs on Aug 22 were matched with dollar-for-dollar counter-tariffs from Canada effective Sept 8.
For more details from the Canadian perspective here’s PM Carney’s speech he gave the day after he suspended the trade talks:
https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/carney-full-remarks-us-trade-talks-suspended-9.7317033
Over the past year, the U.S. has imposed a series of tariffs that violate its commitments under our agreement with them and Mexico, so-called CUSMA. The United States has continually changed their rationale for these actions, from fentanyl to taxes on U.S. tech giants, to certification of U.S. aircraft, to the sharing of tolls of a bridge that Canada built and paid for, to our dairy policy, to provincial decisions to not sell American alcohol during a trade war, to a television advertisement that quoted Ronald Reagan, to smoke from wildfires while they threatened our communities.
If they weren’t our enemy then we wouldn’t have been forced into CanadaUS/NAFTA/CUSMA.
They’ve already destroyed our economy with prior deals, it’s not going to recover if whatever leader that comes in after Carney creates yet another deal with them.
Over the past year, the U.S. has imposed a series of tariffs that violate its commitments under our agreement with them and Mexico, so-called CUSMA.
Canada also violated CUSMA by having trade deals with other countries without US approval.
Further, of course the US is going to tarriff us. They proved that with NAFTA, that’s why we’ve been trying to get out of it for decades.
Canada knows that free trade with the US means they tarriff us but we can’t tariff them, that’s how it’s always been.
I agree, it took way too long for the person who campaigned on getting us away from the US to break off but we had to be militarily ready first.
The only difference with Trump is that he acts like he isn’t already president of Canada like his predecessors but he’s not somehow more hostile than them.
The USA is next door to Canada so of course we are going to trade with them. NAFTA/CUSMA have lead to closer integration between our economies that has been mutually beneficial but we are still separate sovereign countries.
Currently CUSMA restricts new free trade agreements with “non-market” economies which singles out China. Canada does not have a free trade agreement with China. We’ve made a trade deal with them that opens up imports for a limited number of vehicles.
Currently CUSMA restricts new free trade agreements with “non-market” economies
Non-CUSMA participants.
We really don’t want to trade with the US. PAST, PRESENT, OR FUTURE.
Article 32.10 of CUSMA refers to non-market country free trade agreements with which no party has signed a free trade agreement:
The USA is the world’s largest economy right next door. We do want trade but only if it is fair and stable.
And doesn’t involve the Americans, why do you keep leaving that off?
I gave the link to CUSMA. I didn’t think I needed to copy/paste the relevant bits but since you asked, per article 32.10 items 1(a) and 1(b) relates to a “non-market country free trade agreements with which no party has signed a free trade agreement”:
Article 32.10: Non-Market Country FTA
- For the purposes of this Article:
non-market country is a country:
(a) that on the date of signature of this Agreement, a Party has determined to be a non-market economy for purposes of its trade remedy laws; and (b) with which no Party has signed a free trade agreement.
I don’t think I’m leaving anything out.
I honestly don’t care. Hurting the US is irrelevant. Wjust need to do what is best for Canada as a strong and resilient member of the global economy.
Kinda wish they could have hit the problem states a bit harder. Maybe it’ll happen in the next round.
Keep it up, bravo for standing up against the fascism though! Good to hear a large majority of Canadians are supportive.
Kinda wish they could have hit the problem states a bit harder. Maybe it’ll happen in the next round.
You never want to play all your cards early in the game.
The problem states are fairly poor, so this map just looks like a map of US economic activity.
Always blaming Canada instead of Trump.
The headline: States hit by Canada’s tariffs
The first sentence: The U.S. and Canada have imposed tit-for-tat tariffs following a breakdown in trade talks.
The first bullet: Canada has responded to U.S. tariffs with sweeping duties on products including cheese and steel.
The goal of a headline is to hook as many people. If you’re informed, you know that the tariffs are retaliatory. If you’re a Trump supporter, you aren’t clicking an article blaming Trump, because that would make you sad. This headline maximizes clicks and is accurate without losing too much nuance.
The first sentence offers a summary of the article with a bit more nuance. While maintaining a bit of the hook.
The first bullet point summarizing the article places the blame firmly on Trump.
What’s the concern?
What? Why are they in absolute dollars and not a percent of each state’s economy or population?
Yet another population heatmap claiming to be something else?
The Sep 8 Canadian counter-tarrifs tariffs are a “dollar-for-dollar” response to the USA’s Aug 22 tariffs. They aren’t very big in terms of percentage of trade. The latest escalation is around $20 billion USD out of $246 billion USD imported last year from the USA in goods:
https://usafacts.org/articles/us-canada-trade-history-in-six-charts/
Still the impacts will be felt on targeted products such as carpet from Georgia.
People in each state***
