By John Q. Hosedrinker 
The federal government unexpectedly removed more counter-tariffs on American goods than originally stated, according to an order-in-council. This decision seemingly contradicts the prime minister’s earlier statements, which suggested counter-tariffs would be limited to goods not covered under the Canada-U.S.-Mexico Agreement (CUSMA). However, the official notice indicates that, excluding steel, aluminum, and auto industries, all Canadian retaliatory tariffs have been eliminated, even for non-CUSMA compliant products. Experts suggest this shift may be a strategic move to facilitate trade talks with the United States and streamline bureaucratic processes, despite criticism of the approach from some political figures.
Read the original article here
Carney government quietly dropped more U.S. counter-tariffs than advertised, and it appears this move has sparked a mix of reactions. It seems many Canadians, and perhaps the Canadian government itself, recognize that these counter-tariffs, designed as a response to U.S. actions, ultimately ended up hurting Canadians. The idea of retaliatory tariffs, designed to pressure the United States, often felt like a losing game, especially when the ultimate consequence was higher prices for Canadians.
The “dollar for dollar counter tariffs” promise during the campaign, it seems, didn’t fully translate to reality. This discrepancy has led some to question the government’s true strategy. Some see this as a smart political move, understanding that tariffs can be inflationary and counterproductive. It suggests that the government quietly reassessed its approach, deciding that a more strategic and less confrontational stance was in the best interest of Canada. This aligns with the sentiment that focusing on Canadian businesses and industries, and encouraging a “Buy Canadian” movement, is a more effective way to navigate international trade.
Interestingly, the move has also been seen as a way to maintain a positive relationship with the U.S. while simultaneously expanding trade relationships with other nations. Dropping more tariffs than advertised might be a calculated attempt to appear friendly, while quietly pursuing alternative trade agreements. This strategy could be seen as playing the long game, setting the stage for future trade negotiations, particularly when CUSMA (the Canada-United States-Mexico Agreement) comes up for review in the future. The reasoning seems to be that if Canada has a strong portfolio of trade deals, it will hold greater leverage in potential discussions.
The fact that the government chose to quietly adjust the tariff strategy, rather than publicizing it, is what makes the shift noteworthy. This quiet approach has, understandably, triggered questions about transparency, especially amongst those who are critical of the government. Some wonder if this “behind-the-scenes” maneuvering is simply a matter of pragmatism or is perhaps intended to avoid a political fallout. However, others believe the shift indicates a sophisticated approach to economic challenges.
Some people also see it as a way to avoid increasing inflation by retaliatory tariffs. They recognize that the goal of tariffs is often to target specific sectors and put pressure on voters, but it also means that they could be playing the same game as Trump.
It seems like the focus for Carney’s government is to foster trade relationships outside of the U.S. and increase exports. This approach aligns with the idea of a diversified trade strategy, as a way to minimize economic vulnerability. This is especially crucial since the U.S. didn’t change its position even with the counter-tariffs, so it would make sense to simply not use them.
Looking ahead, it’ll be interesting to observe how these new trade agreements affect Canada’s position on the global stage. It may be difficult to notice any changes in the short-term but could be impactful in the long run. As new trade deals are made, more of Canada’s exports will be going to countries other than the US.