Business
Trade retaliation might feel good—but it will hurt Canada’s economy
From the Fraser Institute
To state the obvious, president-elect Donald Trump’s threat to impose an across-the-board 25 per cent tariff on Canadian exports to the United States has gotten the attention of Canadian policymakers who are considering ways to retaliate.
Reportedly, if Trump makes good on his tariff threat, the federal government may levy retaliatory tariffs on a wide range of American-made goods including orange juice, ceramic products such as sinks and toilets, and some steel products. And NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh said he wants Canada to block exports of critical minerals such as aluminum, lithium and potash to the United States, saying that if Trump “wants to pick a fight with Canada, we have to make sure it’s clear that it’s going to hurt Americans as well.”
Indeed, the ostensible goal of tariff retaliation is to inflict economic damage on producers and workers in key U.S. jurisdictions while minimizing harm to Canadian consumers of products imported from the U.S. The hope is that there will be sufficient political blowback from Canada’s retaliation that Republican members of Congress will eventually view Trump’s tariffs as an unacceptable risk to their re-election and pressure him to roll them back.
But while Canadians might feel good about tit-for-tat retaliation against Trump’s trade bullying and taunting, it might well make things worse for the Canadian economy. For example, even selective tariffs will increase the cost of living for Canadians as importers of tariffed U.S. goods pass the tax along to domestic consumers. Retaliatory tariffs might also harm productivity growth in Canada by encouraging increased domestic production of goods that are produced relatively inefficiently here at home compared to in the U.S. Make no mistake—once trade protections are put in place, the beneficiaries have a strong vested interest in having the protections maintained indefinitely. While Trump will be gone in four years, tariffs imposed by Ottawa to retaliate against his actions will likely remain in place for longer.
The U.S. president has substantial leeway under existing legislation to implement trade measures such as tariffs. While Trump has several legislative options to impose new tariffs against Canada and Mexico, he’ll likely use the International Emergency Powers Act (IEEPA), which grants the president power to regulate imports and impose duties in response to an emergency involving any unusual and extraordinary threat to national security, foreign policy or the economy. According to Trump’s rhetoric, the emergency is illegal immigration and drug traffic originating in Canada and Mexico.
However risible Trump’s emergency claim might be when applied to Canada, overturning any action under the IEEPA, or some other enabling legislation, would require a legal challenge. And in fact, because no president has yet used the IEEPA to impose tariffs, the legality of Trump’s actions remains in doubt. In this context, a group of governors sympathetic to Canada’s position (and their own political fortunes) might spearhead a legal challenge to Trump’s tariffs with encouragement and support from the Canadian government.
To be sure, any legal challenge would take time to work its way through the U.S. court system. But it will likely also take time for domestic opposition to Trump’s tariffs to gain sufficient political momentum to effect any change. Indeed, given the current composition of Congress, it’s far from clear that a Team Canada effort to rally broad anti-tariff support among U.S. politicians and business leaders would bear fruit while Trump is in office.
While direct retaliation might be emotionally satisfying to Canadians, it would likely do more economic harm than good. And while a legal challenge will not obviate the immediate economic harm Canada will suffer from Trump’s tariffs, it might help limit the ability of Trump (and any future president) to use trade policy for political leverage in our bilateral relationship. After all, there’s no guarantee that the next president will not be a Trump acolyte.
The Canadian Taxpayers Federation welcomes the Conservative Party’s promise to boost the basic personal amount for working seniors and calls on all parties to commit to further tax relief.
“Many seniors are working because they’re struggling to pay the bills and this tax relief will help them,” said Franco Terrazzano, CTF Federal Director. “Letting working seniors earn an extra $10,000 tax-free is a good thing and it will make their golden years more affordable.”
Today, Conservative Party Leader Pierre Poilievre announced he would expand the tax-free portion of seniors’ incomes.
Poilievre said he would “increase the basic personal amount for working seniors to $25,000, meaning seniors will be able earn an additional $10,000 of employment income tax free.”
Poilievre estimates this would “save a working senior making $35,000 a year an extra $1,300.”
The Conservative Party also promises income tax relief that would save a two-income family up to $1,800. The Liberal Party promises income tax relief that would save a two-income family up to $825.
“The best way the government can make life more affordable is to let people keep more of their own money,” Terrazzano said. “All parties should commit to further tax relief, especially for Canadian businesses which need to be competitive in the wake of American tariffs.”
From the Fraser Institute
By Jake Fuss and Grady Munro
Canadians will head to the polls on April 28 after Prime Minister Mark Carney called a snap federal election on Sunday. As the candidates make their pitch to try and convince Canadians why they’re best-suited to lead the country, Trump’s tariffs will take centre stage. But while the tariff issue is important, let’s not forget the other important issues Canadians face.
High Taxes: As many Canadians struggle to make ends meet, taxes remain the largest single expense. In 2023, the latest year of available data, the average Canadian family spent 43.0 per cent of its income on taxes compared to 35.6 per cent on food, shelter and clothing combined. High personal income tax rates also make it harder to attract and retain doctors, engineers and other high-skilled workers that contribute to the economy. Tax relief, which delivers savings for families across the income spectrum while also improving Canada’s competitiveness on the world stage, is long overdue.
Government Debt: At the end of March, Canada’s total federal debt will reach a projected $2.2 trillion or $52,094 for every man, woman and child in Canada. The federal government expects to pay $53.7 billion in debt interest costs in fiscal year 2024/25, diverting taxpayer dollars away from programs including health care and social services. The next federal government should rein in spending and stop racking up debt.
Red Tape: Smart regulation is necessary, but the Canadian economy is plagued by a costly and excessive regulatory burden imposed by governments. Regulatory compliance costs the economy approximately $12.2 billion each year, and the average business dedicates an estimated 85 days towards compliance. The next federal government should cut undue red tape and make Canada an easier place to do business.
Housing Affordability: Canadians across the country are struggling with the cost of housing. Indeed, Canada has the largest gap between home prices and incomes among G7 countries, and rents have spiked in recent years in many cities. In short, there’s not enough housing to meet demand. The next federal government should avoid policies that stoke further demand while working with the provinces and municipalities to remove impediments to homebuilding across Canada.
Collapsing Business Investment: Business investment is necessary to equip workers with the tools, technology and training they need to be more productive, yet business investment has collapsed. Specifically, from 2014 to 2021, inflation-adjusted business investment per worker fell from $18,363 to $14,687. Declining investment has helped create Canada’s productivity crisis, which has led to a decline in Canadian living standards. Clearly, Ottawa needs a new policy approach to address this crisis.
Declining Living Standards: According to Statistics Canada, inflation-adjusted per-person GDP—a broad measure of living standards—dropped from the post-pandemic peak of $60,718 in mid-2022 to $58,951 by the end of 2024. The next government should swiftly reverse this trend by enacting meaningful policy reforms that will help promote prosperity. The status quo simply will not suffice.
Tariffs are a clear threat to the Canadian economy and should be discussed at length during this election. But we shouldn’t forget other important issues that arose long before President Trump began this trade war and will continue to hurt Canadians if not addressed.
Jake Fuss
Director, Fiscal Studies, Fraser Institute
Grady Munro
Policy Analyst, Fraser Institute
Chinese Narco Suspect Caught in Private Meeting with Trudeau, Investigated by DEA, Linked to Panama, Caribbean, Mexico – Police Sources
Brookfield’s Deep Ties to Chinese Land, Loans, and Green Deals—And a Real Estate Tycoon With CCP Links—Raise Questions as Carney Takes Over from Trudeau
Doug Ford needs to ditch the net-zero pipedreams
Flu Vaccine Exposed: The Shocking NIH Discovery They Don’t Want You to Know
-
Business2 days ago28 energy leaders call for eliminating ALL energy subsidies—even ones they benefit from
-
2025 Federal Election2 days agoCanadian construction worker goes viral for saying he refused to shake Mark Carney’s hand
-
Alberta2 days agoAlberta’s massive oil and gas reserves keep growing – here’s why
-
Health2 days agoDr. Pierre Kory Exposes the Truth About the Texas ‘Measles Death’ Hoax
-
2025 Federal Election2 days agoElection 2025: The Great Rebrand
-
Business1 day agoAll party leaders must oppose April 1 alcohol tax hike
-
Economy1 day agoSupport For National Pipelines And LNG Projects Gain Momentum, Even In Quebec
-
International1 day agoEurope Can’t Survive Without America