Business
Trump’s steel tariffs will hit BC hard

From Resource Works
BC is a huge source of mettalurgical coal, which is used to make steel.
US President Donald Trump’s announcement of 25 percent tariffs on imported steel will send shockwaves through many industries but one of the hardest hit will be British Columbia’s coal industry. As the largest exporter of metallurgical coal in Canada, B.C. relies heavily on global steel production and these tariffs will reduce demand, destabilize prices and disrupt supply chains.
Unlike thermal coal used to generate electricity, over 95 percent of coal mined in British Columbia is metallurgical coal or coking coal. This coal is used to produce coke, a carbon rich fuel used to remove oxygen from iron ore in blast furnaces. Steel production is a big part of global industrial activity and B.C.’s coal industry exists because of that demand.
According to provincial data coal is B.C.’s most valuable mined commodity, generating billions of dollars in revenue each year. B.C. coal is exported mainly to Asian markets like Japan, China, South Korea and India but the US steel industry has been a customer too. A reduction in US steel production due to tariffs could disrupt global steel trade flows and reduce demand for metallurgical coal from B.C. miners.
Trump’s latest 25 percent tariffs on all steel imports is a repeat of what happened in 2018 when similar tariffs were introduced. At that time the tariffs increased costs for US manufacturers and led to retaliatory tariffs from Canada and other trade partners. The economic impact was big – Canadian steel and aluminum producers lost business and retaliatory tariffs were imposed on a range of American goods. The 2018 tariffs also didn’t revitalize US steel production which was 1 percent lower in 2024 than 2017 despite those protectionist measures.
This time the tariffs will hit even harder. Unlike 2018 when Canada and Mexico were eventually exempted after negotiations, this time Trump has said his tariffs will apply to “everybody”. That means the Canadian steel industry will once again be caught in the crossfire and with it the metallurgical coal industry that supplies it.
If Trump’s steel tariffs prevent U.S. manufacturers from importing steel due to higher costs, steel production will decline. That will mean lower global demand for metallurgical coal including B.C.’s high grade supply. B.C. coal miners are already facing challenges from environmental policies, competition from other jurisdictions and regulatory delays. A downturn in demand from steel producers could be the trigger for more mine closures or reductions in production.
Plus these tariffs could start another trade war. Canada retaliated in 2018 with tariffs on U.S. goods like orange juice and whiskey and similar measures may follow this time. The uncertainty will delay investment decisions in Canada’s mining sector especially for new projects or expansions that rely on stable steel demand.
The long term viability of metallurgical coal is already in question as the steel industry looks towards greener production methods like hydrogen based steelmaking. Sweden has already developed facilities that don’t require coking coal and while the transition to such technologies will take decades the latest trade disruptions could accelerate that shift.
Trump’s tariffs are meant to protect U.S. steel makers but history shows they often have the opposite effect, increasing costs for American manufacturers and economic instability for key trading partners. For B.C.’s coal industry the combination of declining steel demand, disrupted supply chains and potential trade retaliation puts the sector in a tough spot.
British Columbia’s coal industry is deeply connected to global steel production making it very exposed to Trump’s latest tariffs. The move will reduce demand for metallurgical coal, disrupt export markets and add more financial stress to the province’s miners. Given Trump’s track record on trade B.C. should prepare for economic uncertainty and look at diversification strategies to mitigate the impact of another round of U.S. protectionism.
Business
Trump Reportedly Shuts Off Flow Of Taxpayer Dollars Into World Trade Organization

From the Daily Caller News Foundation
By Thomas English
The Trump administration has reportedly suspended financial contributions to the World Trade Organization (WTO) as of Thursday.
The decision comes as part of a broader shift by President Donald Trump to distance the U.S. from international institutions perceived to undermine American sovereignty or misallocate taxpayer dollars. U.S. funding for both 2024 and 2025 has been halted, amounting to roughly 11% of the WTO’s annual operating budget, with the organization’s total 2024 budget amounting to roughly $232 million, according to Reuters.
“Why is it that China, for decades, and with a population much bigger than ours, is paying a tiny fraction of [dollars] to The World Health Organization, The United Nations and, worst of all, The World Trade Organization, where they are considered a so-called ‘developing country’ and are therefore given massive advantages over The United States, and everyone else?” Trump wrote in May 2020.
The president has long criticized the WTO for what he sees as judicial overreach and systemic bias against the U.S. in trade disputes. Trump previously paralyzed the organization’s top appeals body in 2019 by blocking judicial appointments, rendering the WTO’s core dispute resolution mechanism largely inoperative.
But a major sticking point continues to be China’s continued classification as a “developing country” at the WTO — a designation that entitles Beijing to a host of special trade and financial privileges. Despite being the world’s second-largest economy, China receives extended compliance timelines, reduced dues and billions in World Bank loans usually reserved for poorer nations.
The Wilson Center, an international affairs-oriented think tank, previously slammed the status as an outdated loophole benefitting an economic superpower at the expense of developed democracies. The Trump administration echoed this criticism behind closed doors during WTO budget meetings in early March, according to Reuters.
The U.S. is reportedly not withdrawing from the WTO outright, but the funding freeze is likely to trigger diplomatic and economic groaning. WTO rules allow for punitive measures against non-paying member states, though the body’s weakened legal apparatus may limit enforcement capacity.
Trump has already withdrawn from the World Health Organization, slashed funds to the United Nations and signaled a potential exit from other global bodies he deems “unfair” to U.S. interests.
Alberta
Albertans have contributed $53.6 billion to the retirement of Canadians in other provinces

From the Fraser Institute
By Tegan Hill and Nathaniel Li
Albertans contributed $53.6 billion more to CPP then retirees in Alberta received from it from 1981 to 2022
Albertans’ net contribution to the Canada Pension Plan —meaning the amount Albertans paid into the program over and above what retirees in Alberta
received in CPP payments—was more than six times as much as any other province at $53.6 billion from 1981 to 2022, finds a new report published today by the Fraser Institute, an independent, non-partisan Canadian public policy think-tank.
“Albertan workers have been helping to fund the retirement of Canadians from coast to coast for decades, and Canadians ought to know that without Alberta, the Canada Pension Plan would look much different,” said Tegan Hill, director of Alberta policy at the Fraser Institute and co-author of Understanding Alberta’s Role in National Programs, Including the Canada Pension Plan.
From 1981 to 2022, Alberta workers contributed 14.4 per cent (on average) of the total CPP premiums paid—Canada’s compulsory, government- operated retirement pension plan—while retirees in the province received only 10.0 per cent of the payments. Alberta’s net contribution over that period was $53.6 billion.
Crucially, only residents in two provinces—Alberta and British Columbia—paid more into the CPP than retirees in those provinces received in benefits, and Alberta’s contribution was six times greater than BC’s.
The reason Albertans have paid such an outsized contribution to federal and national programs, including the CPP, in recent years is because of the province’s relatively high rates of employment, higher average incomes, and younger population.
As such, if Alberta withdrew from the CPP, Alberta workers could expect to receive the same retirement benefits but at a lower cost (i.e. lower payroll tax) than other Canadians, while the payroll tax would likely have to increase for the rest of the country (excluding Quebec) to maintain the same benefits.
“Given current demographic projections, immigration patterns, and Alberta’s long history of leading the provinces in economic growth, Albertan workers will likely continue to pay more into it than Albertan retirees get back from it,” Hill said.
Understanding Alberta’s Role in National Programs, Including the Canada Pension Plan
- Understanding Alberta’s role in national income transfers and other important programs is crucial to informing the broader debate around Alberta’s possible withdrawal from the Canada Pension Plan (CPP).
- Due to Alberta’s relatively high rates of employment, higher average incomes, and younger population, Albertans contribute significantly more to federal revenues than they receive back in federal spending.
- From 1981 to 2022, Alberta workers contributed 14.4 percent (on average) of the total CPP premiums paid while retirees in the province received only 10.0 percent of the payments. Albertans net contribution was $53.6 billion over the period—approximately six times greater than British Columbia’s net contribution (the only other net contributor).
- Given current demographic projections, immigration patterns, and Alberta’s long history of leading the provinces in economic growth and income levels, Alberta’s central role in funding national programs is unlikely to change in the foreseeable future.
- Due to Albertans’ disproportionate net contribution to the CPP, the current base CPP contribution rate would likely have to increase to remain sustainable if Alberta withdrew from the plan. Similarly, Alberta’s stand-alone rate would be lower than the current CPP rate.
Tegan Hill
Director, Alberta Policy, Fraser Institute
-
Justice2 days ago
Democracy watchdog calls for impartial prosecution of Justin Trudeau
-
2025 Federal Election1 day ago
Poilievre refuses to bash Trump via trick question, says it’s possible to work with him and be ‘firm’
-
Business2 days ago
Publicity Kills DEI: A Free Speech Solution to Woke Companies
-
Dr. Robert Malone2 days ago
WHO and G20 Exaggerate the Risk and Economic Impact of Outbreaks
-
2025 Federal Election1 day ago
Voters should remember Canada has other problems beyond Trump’s tariffs
-
2025 Federal Election1 day ago
Poilievre to let working seniors keep more of their money
-
2025 Federal Election2 days ago
Canadian officials warn Communist China ‘highly likely’ to interfere in 2025 election
-
COVID-191 day ago
17-year-old died after taking COVID shot, but Ontario judge denies his family’s liability claim