On Monday, President Trump warned that he would raise tariffs on Canadian automobiles, trucks, auto parts and steel to 50 percent, effective January 1, as ties with the United States’ nearest ally drift toward a full‑scale trade conflict.

Posting on Truth Social, he declared that Canada ranked “among the worst nations in the world to deal with” and warned it would “be treated like a state no longer.”

He added, “They feel entitled, yet we don’t need Canada—they need us.”

U.S.-Canada trade tensions have flared in recent days after negotiations collapsed and President Trump levied a 50 percent duty on $20 billion of Canadian exports on Saturday.

He had originally threatened the tariffs to prod Canada into quicker talks and to lift some of its retaliatory steps against earlier duties. Despite weeks of negotiation — and repeated assurances from the president that an agreement was imminent — the two sides said late Friday that no deal had been reached.

The fresh U.S. tariffs drew sharp criticism in Washington, with congressional Democrats condemning the administration and even a few Republicans warning that the duties could push domestic prices higher.

“Since the tariffs were announced, I’ve heard from businesses, farmers, and lobstermen worried about the cost of complying, the thinness of domestic supply chains, and the prospect of Canadian retaliation,” said Senator Susan Collins, Republican of Maine, in a weekend statement. She called on the administration to resume negotiations, noting the harm a trade clash could inflict on local families and businesses.

Collins, regarded as one of the most vulnerable incumbents facing the 2026 midterms, has often disagreed with the administration. She earlier told local outlets she would likely skip a Monday event with Vice President JD Vance, who visited Maine to address a manufacturing plant as part of a push to galvanize supporters before the November vote.

In Canada, the president’s move triggered an immediate and defiant reaction. On Saturday, Prime Minister Mark Carney declared that the historic allies were “at war” over trade and vowed to retaliate with tariffs on U.S. agriculture, electronics, steel and other sectors.

Canadian officials blamed the breakdown on U.S. negotiators, saying Washington introduced last‑minute demands that derailed the talks. Conversely, U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer insisted that Canadian leaders bore responsibility.

Soon after the negotiations broke down, Greer told The New York Times that the U.S. proposal had included reducing tariffs on steel, aluminum and automobiles, and completely removing a lumber duty Trump had imposed the previous year. On CNBC Monday, he added that Canadian officials were also urging the United States to lift some tariffs on heavy‑duty vehicles.

Greer said to CNBC, “By Tuesday night we had reached enough common ground to announce a deal was in sight. We then moved to finalize it, but in the final hours the Canadians appeared to want additional concessions.”

He continued, “I’m not sure whether their stance was political. It doesn’t make economic sense, but maybe upcoming by‑elections played a role. They pushed for more, and we weren’t willing to concede.”

It remains uncertain which legal authority President Trump would invoke to enact the tariffs he threatened on Monday. Although the Supreme Court has blocked several of his global tariffs this year, various statutes remain available for imposing duties on steel, automobiles and other sectors.

The 50 percent duty on $20 billion of Canadian exports that took effect Saturday rests on Section 338 of the Tariff Act of 1930, an obscure provision never previously used to levy tariffs. Experts warn the measure could face legal challenges in the weeks ahead.

Zolan Kanno-Youngs contributed reporting.

Source link

Exit mobile version