Connect with us

Business

Elbow to the Face: What Canada Risks by Embracing Economic Nationalism

Published

7 minute read

By Peter Shawn Taylor

There was free trade between Canada and the U.S. before there was a country called Canada. In 1854, 13 years before Confederation, the colonies of British North America signed a reciprocity agreement with the Americans that allowed for free trade in lumber, meat, grains, coal, pitch and tar and other basic goods. This quickly led to an economic boom throughout Canada that lasted until the Americans revoked the deal in 1866.

Since then, trade relations between Canada and the U.S. have been on a merry-go-round alternating between protectionism and openness depending on the political mood in each country. It is an historical legacy that holds many valuable lessons for how Canada should respond to the current Trump tariffs. And perhaps the best source of advice can be found in what historians today call the “Nixon Shocks”.

In the early 1970s, U.S. president Richard Nixon was dogged by a new economic malaise termed “stagflation”. In response to this erosion in America’s financial might, Nixon upended global economic relations with his New Economic Policy, taking the U.S. off the gold standard, instituting wage and price controls and imposing a 10 per cent tariff on all imports. To Canada’s shock and horror, it too was subjected to Nixon’s tariffs.

During the postwar period Canada and the U.S. had slowly been embracing freer trade and so the tariffs were seen as a serious break in Canada’s access to the U.S. market. Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau argued vigorously for an exemption, but was unsuccessful. (Sound familiar?)

In response to being rebuffed by Nixon, the Trudeau government released a white paper outlining three possible reactions. The first was to maintain the status quo. Second, seek even stronger economic relations with the U.S. Third, look elsewhere. The Trudeau government found the final choice, what became known as the Third Option, to be the most attractive and pursued it aggressively.

In addition to seeking out trade with other countries, the Trudeau government also tried to expand Canada’s political and cultural relations with other countries, especially Communist countries such as the Soviet Union, China and Cuba. At home, the Third Option gave birth to many deliberately protectionism policies meant to keep the Americans at bay, including the Foreign Investment Review Agency and the National Energy Program.

The Third Option’s overarching objective was to sever Canada’s deep economic and cultural ties with the U.S. It didn’t work. There was no real diversification of Canada’s export trade away from the Americans, despite all the self-harm caused by the NEP and other policies. Today, the Third
Option is widely acknowledged to have been a complete failure.

In recognition of this failure, in 1982 Trudeau set up the Royal Commission on the Economic Union and Development Prospects for Canada headed by
Donald S. Macdonald to investigate all aspects of the Canadian economy and deliver advice on how to “respond to the challenges of rapid national
and international change in order to realize Canada’s potential.”

The Macdonald Commission’s final report, delivered in 1985 to Progressive Conservative Prime Minister Brian Mulroney was a conclusive repudiation
of the Third Option and instead called for a free trade deal with the U.S.

To his credit, Mulroney set aside his party’s old animus towards free trade and entered into negotiations with U.S. President Ronald Reagan. The
result was the 1989 Canada-U.S. Free Trade Agreement, which was later followed by 1993’s NAFTA. And while these deals caused some dislocation
to Canada’s economy, the net result has been overwhelmingly positive – the same as was the case in 1854. The very fact Canadians today consider
Trump’s tariffs to be an economic crisis reveal how important free trade with the Americans has become to Canada.

Given these lessons of history, how should Canadians respond to the Trump Shocks today?

First, there’s no getting around the fact that Canada’s prosperity will always depend on trade with the U.S. Today, as was the case in the 1970s, more
than two-thirds of Canada’s exports go south of the border. Economic nationalism is not a winning strategy, as our experience in the 1970s with the Third Option demonstrates.

Second, history also tells us that the U.S. will eventually come around to recognizing the benefits of free trade. Higher tariffs mean higher prices and
less choice for American consumers, after all. Canada’s best chance for long-term success lies in making common cause with American interests
equally hard hit by tariffs, particularly in border states.

Third, while Canada waits for the U.S. to come back to its senses, we can’t ignore our own home-grown problems. In particular, Canada needs to
address its productivity crisis. Where we were once a top tier country in terms of productivity, today we are ranked 22 nd out of 32 OECD countries.
Fixing this issue will require tough choices, including reforming the tax code, investing in basic infrastructure, promoting competition, curtailing
social programs and pushing back against Indigenous veto-seeking.

It won’t be easy, but the current bout of patriotism and a ready-made villain in Trump means Canadians may be more accept such hardships in the
short-term. We should take advantage of the opportunity.

The best response to Trump’s tariffs is not to invent new ways to hate our neighbours, but to fix our own flaws. Only when our house is back in order
will we be ready to take full advantage of the American market when freer trade returns. And based on 171 years of experience, we can be sure it will.

Peter Shawn Taylor is senior features editor at C2CJournal.ca, where the original, longer version of this article first appeared.

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

Business

Trump’s long-promised “reciprocal tariff” regime is no longer a threat — it’s the new world order.

Published on

MXM logo MxM News

Quick Hit:

The world woke up Friday to Trump’s tariff world order — with a rate-modifying executive order enforcing the terms of Liberation Day, imposing tariffs up to 41% on countries that failed to cut a deal with the United States.

Key Details:

  • The executive order builds on Trump’s April Liberation Day proclamation, which declared chronic U.S. trade deficits a national emergency and imposed ad valorem tariffs on nearly 70 countries.
  • Thursday’s follow-up order modifies tariff levels, effective seven days after signing, with full penalties up to 41% now locked in for countries that failed to reach meaningful trade or security agreements with the U.S.
  • Transshipped goods — products routed through third countries to evade tariffs — will be hit with a flat 40% duty and no possibility for leniency. A blacklist of violators will be published every six months.

Diving Deeper:

President Donald Trump formalized a new phase of his Liberation Day trade strategy on Thursday, signing an executive order that rewrites tariff rates and tightens enforcement across the global economy. With this action, Trump’s long-promised “reciprocal tariff” regime is no longer a threat — it’s the new world order.

The executive order, issued from the White House Thursday, amends the original April declaration that framed persistent U.S. trade deficits as a national emergency. That earlier order imposed broad-based duties on nearly 70 countries. Thursday’s update locks in or adjusts those penalties depending on each country’s progress — or lack thereof — in negotiations with the United States.

For countries that reached or are nearing “meaningful trade and security commitments” with the United States, temporary rates will remain in place as agreements are finalized. For the rest, full penalties apply — with tariffs ranging from 10% to 41%, as outlined in Annex I of the order.

The European Union receives a tailored formula: if a product’s current U.S. tariff is under 15%, the new combined rate will be pushed to that floor. Goods already above 15% will not face additional penalties.

But the most aggressive provision of the order targets a growing tactic of tariff evasion — transshipping. Under Section 3, goods that are determined by Customs and Border Protection to have been rerouted through third countries to avoid tariffs will face an automatic 40% penalty. Mitigation or reduction of that duty is explicitly barred under the order.

Trump’s team will also release a biannual blacklist of known violators — naming countries and facilities involved in circumvention schemes. This list will inform public procurement, national security reviews, and corporate due diligence.

The order empowers the Departments of Commerce, Homeland Security, Treasury, and the U.S. Trade Representative to implement the policy, issue regulations, and take “all necessary actions” to enforce it.

Countries that failed to reach a deal by the deadline now face the consequences. Those still negotiating have little time left. And for businesses and governments around the world, the message is clear: American leverage is back — and it comes with a price tag.

Continue Reading

Business

Canada’s postal service would benefit from liberalization, privatization, new MEI publication shows

Published on

From the Montreal Economic Institute

  • Canada Post has accumulated $3.8 billion in losses since 2018.
  • The Crown corporation is receiving a $1-billion taxpayer loan to stay afloat in 2025-2026.
  • Privatization should include an employee share ownership plan.

Privatizing Canada Post and opening up the sector to competition would result in better services and lower prices for Canadians, shows a new publication released by the MEI.

“Canadians are held hostage by a postal system that is inefficient, strike-prone, and, increasingly, financially non-viable,” says Vincent Geloso, senior economist at the MEI and co-author of the report. “We should follow the lead of European countries like Germany that have liberalized and privatized their postal services, with excellent results.”

Canada Post has a federal monopoly on regular letter mail, making it the only entity legally permitted to deliver non-express letters.

The Crown corporation has run deficits for seven straight years, accumulating over $3.6 billion in losses over the past decade.

Meanwhile, letter volume in Canada has fallen from 5.5 billion letters in 2006 to 2 billion in 2024, a 64 per cent decline.

Canada Post’s market share in parcel delivery has also cratered, falling from 62 per cent in 2019 to 24 per cent in 2024, as private competitors have captured more of the growing market.

In December 2024, more than 55,000 Canada Post workers went on a 32-day strike that ground mail and parcel delivery to a halt causing a backlog of nearly 10 million packages, impacting individuals and businesses alike. The strike reportedly cost small businesses an estimated $1.6 billion.

This past May, another union issued a strike notice and began a nationwide overtime ban, again obstructing delivery volumes. Currently, Canada Post employees are voting on the corporation’s latest offer; if the vote fails, there are fears that another strike would ensue.

“There is an inherent problem with monopolies,” explains Mr. Geloso. “No competition means no incentive to be efficient or innovate, which means higher prices by way of increased costs, and consumers are left with no alternative.”

In 1989, Germany decided to open up its market to a limited amount of competition, and by 2008, the sector was fully liberalized.

Privatization of Deutsche Post started in 2000, and currently, the government holds only a small minority stake in the former monopoly.

Today, over 15,000 firms offer some sort of postal service in Germany. The country’s mail service generally outperforms those of other European countries.

In Canada, the cost of sending a letter is 50 per cent higher today than it was in 1989 (inflation-adjusted).

In Germany, postage prices have fallen by 10 per cent over the same period (after accounting for inflation).

The MEI recommends the following steps to kickstart a two-year process of privatizing Canada Post:

  • Offer employees shares: This would give workers a stake in the company’s success and help prevent insiders from taking advantage during the transition (i.e., avoid asset-stripping).
  • Avoid regulatory capture: A swift reform process would reduce the risk of special interest groups lobbying regulators to lock in unfair advantages in the law.

“Canada Post’s inability to adapt to the changing market shows that it won’t get better on its own; it needs a massive overhaul,” says Mr. Geloso. “Canadians are paying a lot for a second-rate service; Germany showed us how we can turn this around.”

The MEI Economic Note is available here.

* * *

The MEI is an independent public policy think tank with offices in Montreal, Ottawa, and Calgary. Through its publications, media appearances, and advisory services to policymakers, the MEI stimulates public policy debate and reforms based on sound economics and entrepreneurship.

Continue Reading

Trending

X