Skip to main content

Language Flag Filename

rbc_language_toggle_menu_flag

In this week’s edition: Three areas where Canada and Mexico can deepen ties, how one smart idea can help alleviate canola farmers’ China challenge, and why infrastructure, not policy, may be holding us back.

By Jordan Brennan, RBC’s Head of Thought Leadership

Six months into President Trump’s trade war, with no deal in sight, Canada has good reason to deepen its partnership with Mexico. (And, based on a couple of recent trips south, the federal and Alberta governments agree).

Despite being Canada’s third largest trading partner, Mexico accounts for less than 4% of Canada’s global merchandise trade, the bulk of which is imports. In 2024, Canada shipped just $9 billion of goods to Mexico while importing $47 billion of Mexican goods.

Make no mistake, no country can displace the U.S. when it comes to trading significance for Canada. But we see three broad areas where Canada and Mexico can deepen ties.

  • Build Bridges & Infrastructure. Canada’s ‘Maple Eight’ pension funds, with north of $2 trillion in assets, are among the largest in the world and possess expertise in major infrastructure projects like pipelines, rail and port capacity. That’s what Mexico needs: patient capital with financing expertise. Canadian capital is a source of financial influence that could be leveraged to advance geopolitical and trade interests, and enhance commercial ties. Canadian Pacific Kansas City Rail’s investment in the Patrick J. Ottensmeyer International Railway Bridge—a $100M project launched earlier this year that deployed innovative technology to improve continental cargo mobility on the U.S.-Mexico border—is a case in point.   

  • Boost Bilateral Trade. Many of Canada’s export industries—from energy to steel and aluminum, copper, agri-food, softwood lumber, pulp and paper, and plastics—are products the 130-million strong nation imports. Enhanced trade flows, underwritten by the current CUSMA, could help several of our stressed industries find relief.

  • Unite On CUSMA. While the U.S. will remain the cornerstone of North American trade, both Canada and Mexico must prepare for the joint review of the CUSMA, which is officially scheduled for 2026 but may come sooner. Rather than being played against one another, which Trump has successfully orchestrated until now, diplomatic coordination between Canada and Mexico could affirm treaty mechanisms, ensuring duty-free access for CUSMA-compliant goods. Trade irritants in specific industries (think supply management) and trans-shipment for Chinese goods must be managed. With trade nested in a broader framework that includes border security, defence, infrastructure, and supply chain integrity, all three countries can be made better off by deepening their cooperation, ensuring balanced and mutually beneficial trade across the bloc.

  • China tariffs on Canadian canola seed exports have prompted calls on the government to limit imports of vegetable oil. Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre is also demanding the Carney government cancel a $1-billion loan BC Ferries is using to buy Chinese-built vessels.

  • China also filed a lawsuit over Canada’s import restrictions on steel.

  • The Ontario government is introducing a $1 billion emergency loan program to qualifying businesses in the steel, aluminum, and auto sectors impacted by U.S. tariffs.

  • Trade war ripples start to show in U.S. wholesale prices, which were up 3.3%in June YoY, the biggest jump since February.

  • As it looks to reshore some of its manufacturing–and create 1,000 U.S. jobs–GE Appliances is investing $3-billion in its U.S. factories over the next five years.

By Yadullah Hussain, Managing Editor, RBC Thought Leadership

Canada’s canola crisis has deepened. Beijing’s 75.8% duty on Canada’s most valuable crop comes after its preliminary investigation found Ottawa provided subsidies and preferential treatment to its farmers.

The levy on canola seeds adds to Beijing’s 100% tariffs already in effect on Canada’s canola oil and meals. Back in April, the Canadian Canola Growers Association (CCGA) told us that farmers were freezing investments over fears that a tariff on canola seeds was the “big shoe to drop.” Chris Davison, President and CEO of the Canola Council of Canada, now believes the Chinese market is “effectively closed” to Canadian canola producers.

That’s another $4.5 billion of commodity trade disrupted and now in search of new, tariff-free markets, joining lumber, aluminum and steel.

Here’s how Canada’s canola crisis is playing out:

  • Squeezed by two economic giants: Could Beijing be trying to get Ottawa to remove the 100% tariffs on Chinese EVs, and 25% on Chinese steel and aluminum? Beijing will make a final call on canola seed duties in September. But Ottawa is in a bind as it had raised tariffs on imported aluminum and steel to appease Washington’s concern that countries, including China, were Canada as a backdoor to the U.S. market.

  • Meal plan goes awry: China’s canola meal imports from Canada whittled down to 32,506 tonnes in June—from 141,938 tonnes in June 2024—Statistics Canada data shows.

  • Oil turmoil: Canada’s canola oil exportsto China amounted to a big fat zero from China in June, industry data shows.

  • Seed money: Canada’s canola seed shipment to China had fallen to 237,897 tonnes by June 2025, compared to 651,080 tonnes during the same period last year.

  • Farmers want a cash injection: Farmers should not be asked to borrow their way through a crisis that’s not of their making, the CCGA states. Although that would only exacerbate Beijing’s concerns of Ottawa subsidizing the industry.

Beijing’s concerns of Ottawa subsidizing the industry.

  • Ease the pain: Boosting domestic demand and processing capacity of biofuels like Sustainable Aviation Fuel (SAF) presents one opportunity to diversify canola demand as a biofuel feedstock. According to Lisa Ashton, our Agriculture Policy Lead: “Canada should consider looking at other countries’ playbooks for expanding domestic biofuel markets and agriculture’s role in its growth.” Brazil, Japan, and Malaysia are all expanding processing capacity for biofuels including SAF and increasing required biodiesel and ethanol blends in convention fuels.

Jordan Brennan, RBC’s Head of Thought Leadership, recently connected with Trevor Tombe, at the University of Calgary’s School of Public Policy.

Q: What can the federal government do to lessen our dependence on the U.S.?
A: We face significant constraints. Canada’s ability to expand trade with other countries through trade agreements is largely exhausted. India and China, for geopolitical reasons, are unlikely prospects in the near term. Our limitation is not policy, but infrastructure. Geography remains a stubborn fact that requires substantial infrastructure investment. Expanding upon our rail and port infrastructure is a renewed priority federally but will take many years to move the needle.

Q: What do you see as the long-term impact of Trump’s tariff wars globally?
A: The uncertainty from tariff threats alone dampens investment. That itself may lead to a permanent reduction in Canadian productivity if investors perceive a higher level of risk in Canada due to uncertain market access in the U.S. Globally, if there’s one lesson from the 1930s, it’s that protectionist spirals deepen economic pain for all participants. While tariffs might temporarily boost some U.S. industries, the costs to global efficiency and consumer welfare would be substantial.

Q: Are there any new insights that challenge the prevailing wisdom about the broad-based benefits of free trade?
A: The fundamental case for liberalized trade remains strong. But it requires resources, production, and employment to shift across sectors and regions. Some of my work suggests between 1-2% of Canada’s workforce could migrate across provinces in response to eliminating internal trade costs. While these moves are productivity-enhancing for the overall economy in the long run, there are adjustment costs for individuals and some affected businesses impose significant short-term costs on those individuals.

Related: Read Brennan and Tombe’s discussion on interprovincial trade barriers.

Canada imported $43.4 million of distilled spirits from the U.S.—that’s down 62% June YoY. American wine imports were also down 67%.

Language Flag Filename

rbc_language_toggle_menu_flag

  • Canada and Mexico agreed to increase collaboration in several key areas: from supply chains and AI to energy security and the digital economy.

  • Trump follows through on his threat to double tariffs on India to 50% for buying oil from Russia.

  • U.S. shipments of orange juice to Canada plummeted to a more than 20-year low in June, new data shows.

  • Japan says the Trump administration promises to fix an “extremely regrettable” tariff rate mistake connected to its deal with the U.S.

  • In a new survey, nearly 90% say tariffs have negatively impacted U.S. manufacturing and production.

  • Trump threatens to impose 100% tariffs on foreign semiconductors unless businesses promise to invest in the U.S.

  • As of midnight on August 8, new U.S. tariff rates came into effect on 90-plus countries.

Despite Canada’s growing ambition to widen its pool of trading partners, the latest trade data indicates that diversification is challenging. Exports to countries other than to the U.S. were largely flat in the second quarter–the slight uptick in non-U.S. exports was primarily due to higher gold shipments to the U.K., which more than doubled in value compared to last year because of higher prices.



Nathan Janzen, Assistant Chief Economist with RBC Economics, provides some clarity amid all the chaos around trade.

Q: Can you attach a dollar figure on what U.S. tariffs are costing the Canadian economy?
A: Reduced economic growth on both sides of the border, much of that coming from the uncertainty around future trade policy, has frozen business investment decisions. Canada’s retaliatory tariff measures have been significant in some sectors, including increased tariffs on steel imports from countries other than the U.S., and are raising input costs for Canadian businesses.

But on a relative basis, tariffs have raised costs more in the U.S. than in Canada. Tariff revenues collected by the Canadian federal government, paid by Canadian buyers, rose about $2 billion from a year ago from March through May, which was 1.8% of the value of total goods imported over that period. And a significant portion of those revenues collected will be returned to businesses through a remission process. By comparison, U.S. tariff revenue collected, paid by U.S. buyers, increased $48 billion over that same period, and rose to 10% of the value of imports in June. That is the highest average U.S. tariff rate since the 1940s.

Q: How much has CUSMA shielded Canadian exports?
A: Canada’s pre-existing trade agreement with the United States has backstopped duty free access for the bulk of Canadian exports to the United States. About 90% of Canadian exports have continued to access the United States market duty free March through June and Canada has been left with the lowest average effective tariff rate of any major U.S. trading partner, even with the August 1 increase in the tariff rate to 35% on Canadian exports not compliant with CUSMA.

Maintaining that exemption for duty free trade under CUSMA is critical for Canadian exporters, but is also critical for Canada’s trade partners in the U.S.—Canada was the top export destination for 32 U.S. states last year, and the top import source for 22. The CUSMA agreement does not automatically expire until 2036, but critical negotiations to extend the agreement begin next year.

Q: Canada and Mexico agreed this week to collaborate more closely on trade. What opportunities do you see?
A: More Canadian trade diversification is great—that includes offshore opportunities but also increased trade with Mexico and between Canadian provinces. International trade in services has also been a growing share of both Canadian and global trade, and it is easier to diversify trade in something like professional services where geographic distance is less of a barrier.

But a huge share of trade flows in North America are in the heavily integrated manufacturing sector—and decades of free integration of Canada/U.S./Mexico supply chains means that the sector doesn’t really work without any one participant. U.S. tariffs on products like steel, aluminum, and copper raise input costs and reduce the competitiveness of that integrated North American manufacturing ecosystem relative to offshore production chains in Europe and Asia. It’s not possible to diversify that kind of trade in the short tern without significant, negative economic disruptions on both sides of the border.

US$12 billion

How much the trade war is said to have cost automakers—so far.

Language Flag Filename

rbc_language_toggle_menu_flag


By Jordan Brennan, Head of Thought Leadership

The August 1st deadline came and went without a deal. As a result, the ‘fentanyl tariffs’ on Canadian exports to the U.S. are set to rise from 25% to 35%. This is in addition to sector-specific tariffs (referred to as ‘section 232’ tariffs), which include 50% on steel and aluminum, 50% on some copper products and 25% on the non-American content of finished vehicles.

From one perspective, the absence of a deal can be interpreted negatively. The chill on business investment, which is already chronically weak in Canada, will persist until the tariff war reaches some sort of binding resolution.

On the other hand, the absence of an agreement could be a sign that the Canadian negotiating team is bargaining hard. And with the USMCA backstopping the fentanyl tariffs, the effective tariff rate on Canadian exports will be far less than the 35% base rate.

RBC ran the numbers and found that more than 90% of Canadian merchandise exports to the U.S. are USMCA-compliant and therefore enter duty-free. For all the big, scary numbers, our best estimate is that the effective tariff rate on Canadian exports is about 5% but lower in practice. This reflects the skill and savvy of the Canadian negotiating team, in part, who secured the USMCA backstop, but it also points to the fact that American prosperity, especially in the purple states, is dependent on trade with Canada.



Take the auto industry. President Trump secured the White House, in part, because of support from blue-collar workers in the old rust-belt states who historically supported the Democrats but flipped Republican in 2024. The North American auto industry is built on a north-south axis, with supply chains connecting key producing states like Michigan, Indiana and Ohio with Canadian provinces.

There’s scant evidence that the tariff war, including the 232 tariffs on auto, are bringing auto jobs back to American factories. Recent data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics shows that manufacturing employment in general, and motor vehicle and parts manufacturing in particular, is down since Trump came into office. This inter-dependence puts Canada in a stronger negotiating position than we might be led to believe, given Canada’s dependence on trade with our American neighbours.

We will be watching things unfold in the coming weeks and expect that a deal of some sort will be reached. In the meantime, Trump’s negotiating teams struck a flurry of deals with key trading partners over the past 10 days, including the EU, Japan, and South Korea. Amidst the chaos and uncertainty, a pattern is beginning to emerge.

In exchange for preferential tariff rates, America’s trading partners are pledging large investments and purchases in the American market and are providing enhanced market access for American exporters, with select sectoral exemptions and carveouts. The ‘deals’ struck so far, which appear to be frameworks for negotiations, are distributed across three broad categories:

  • Close Allies: With the US-UK Economic and Prosperity Deal, the UK secured the most favourable terms to date, with a baseline tariff of 10%. Exemptions and carveouts mean the effective tariff rate could be lower than 10%. The deal focuses on agriculture, auto, aerospace, pharmaceuticals, with steel and aluminum facing higher rates.   

  • The Trading Core: The EU, Japan and South Korea, which are among America’s largest trading partners, have secured a baseline tariff of 15%, which puts them on an even-footing with one another. Again, exemptions and carveouts mean the effective tariff rate could be lower.

  • Everyone Else: Countries that do not secure preferential rates will be subject to an elevated baseline tariff or ad hoc tariff rate (e.g. 50% tariff on Brazil).

Deal or no deal, Canada faces significant headwinds. A multi-year productivity recession combined with tightened immigration, trade frictions, and elevated macro uncertainty mean there are difficult choices ahead for Canada’s political and business leaders.

  • On top of increasing Canada’s tariff rate right before his August 1 deadline, Trump levelled costly tariffs on a number of countries—including 39% on Switzerland.

  • Mexico gets a 90-day reprieve following a call between Trump and Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum.

  • Transshipments—goods sent to the U.S. through other countries in an attempt to bypass country-of-origin tariffs—will now get hit with a 40% tariff. Experts say China will be hit hardest by the U.S. cracking down on indirect shipments.  

  • U.S. transport stocks suffer biggest dip since April; Dow Jones Transportation Average fell 7%.  

  • Ford, the second biggest U.S. automaker, says the trade deals with the EU, Japan and South Korea puts it at a serious disadvantage since most of its cars are made in America and it  relies on importing parts. In Q2 alone, Ford says tariffs cost the company US$800 million.

  • Fallout from the U.S.-EU trade deal leads to the worst week for the Euro since 2022.

Language Flag Filename

rbc_language_toggle_menu_flag

The Trump administration’s sweeping AI Action Plan, released last week, moves the global AI race into a new realm. It’s no longer just a race between OpenAI and Google; it’s a geopolitical contest that the world’s greatest tech power is doubling down on, as it seeks to influence (and dominate) the digital decades ahead.

Canada will need to move fast.

Here’s what stands out to me in the Trump policy:

  • Jurisdiction. Big data (and AI) is inherently global and local. And now Trump wants to unshackle Big Tech from state-level regulations on AI. Mark Carney may soon face the same challenges with the provinces, as he tries to develop a “one economy” approach to so many things. Both Carney and Trump will face push back if and when the big platforms move into health and education data—seen to be subnational jurisdictions in both countries. But in very different ways, they will need to figure out how to balance individual, local, national and global, in an AI age.

  • Ideology. Trump is aiming to “de-woke” AI models. I’m not sure how you do that, especially if you want to avoid some kind of version of thought police patrolling algorithms. I’m not suggesting AI models shouldn’t be accountable to public standards, including free speech. We just don’t know how to temper what we’ve unleashed, other than to prosecute developers under the law, just as we do with other forms of speech. Whatever your view, the Trump policy begins a new chapter in the politicization of tech.

  • Investment. A gold rush is underway for data centres and will continue to draw billions of dollars. Trump is laser-focused on keeping and building them in the U.S. Canada can continue to feed that model with our energy, financial capital and data—or build our own competitive strategy. I recently talked with a major investor who is waiting (and waiting) for approval for a mega-billion-dollar Canadian data centre, while he’s moving ahead with similar state-side projects. Data waits for no government.

  • Sovereignty. This may be the most challenging one for Canada. The U.S. and Chinese models, and clouds, have become so big and powerful it’s hard to imagine other countries creating anything to rival them. But there’s a chance for Canada. We have global tech leaders, in OpenText, Shopify and Cohere, and some competitive advantages in our own data sets, especially in health care. Is there a moonshot opportunity to build a Canadian rival? And will that require the same sort of techno-nationalist policies we’re seeing emerge in the U.S. and Europe.

As America aims to dominate AI, Canada will need our own human ingenuity to thrive in this new digital order.

Language Flag Filename

rbc_language_toggle_menu_flag

In this week’s edition: Signals from the U.S.-Japan deal, the cost of interprovincial trade barriers, and Trump sets his sights on supply management

  • U.S. President Trump, who celebrated a trade deal with Japan earlier in the week, ended the week saying that he wasn’t sure a deal with Canada would be reached–and that the U.S. may unilaterally impose more tariffs on its neighbour.

  • One‑third of Canadian firms expect tariff‑related cost spikes, down from two‑thirds last quarter, due largely to USMCA exemptions. And half of firms already face higher costs, yet many can’t pass them on, squeezing margins.

  • In a joint statement, Canada’s premiers call on the Carney government to “improve the overall trade relationship” with China.

  • Algoma Steel, which sells about 60% of its output to the U.S., is seeking between $400 and $600 million in tariff relief from Ottawa.

  • U.S. President Trump indicates that 15% is as low as the U.S. is willing to go on tariffs.

Tucked away in Japan’s trade deal with the U.S. was a US$550-billion pledge to create a sovereign wealth fund overseen by the U.S. President himself. Could that prove to be the blueprint for Canada and the EU, both of whom are angling to seal trade deals before Aug.1?

Details of the Japan fund are vague with both parties characterizing it very differently: The U.S. sees it as a 90:10 partnership in the U.S. taxpayer’s favour, with Washington dictating Japanese companies where to invest; Tokyo sees it as an investment pledge from Japan Inc. The U.S. is increasingly blurring the lines between creating an ecosystem that facilitates investments to what some are calling state intervention over business investments and activities. The most recent example: A US$400-million direct, China-style investment in rare-earth minerals company MP Materials by the Pentagon—a deal that has been criticized by industry competitors for its overreach.

The U.S. state creep poses a challenge for North American markets that are fair and free, but could start seeing U.S. federal-based entities coming to the fore—a new generation of government-backed entities that Western governments have criticized autocratic states for over the past several decades.

Canada has much to offer to the U.S. as an investor, but in the right circumstances. Canadian stock of U.S. foreign direct investment stands at US$812 billion, second only to Japan’s US$819 billion. In theory, more Canadian investments could be channeled into the U.S., structured to enrich Canadian domestic supply chains as well. The continued integration of Canada and the U.S., in public and corporate sectors, should result in positive spill-over effects for Canada in terms of investments, business activity and trade. There are also may be plenty of room for a slew of joint Canada-U.S. projects—in critical minerals, automotives, nuclear, fossil fuels and electricity, among others.

But if a joint fund of some description is on the table, it can’t be a blank cheque to Washington.
It’s crunch time for Canada, which is also facing 35% tariffs for all non-USMCA compliant goods if a deal is not struck (Both Carney and Trump have downplayed chances of a trade deal by Aug.1.) We may have to contend with 15%, which seems to be the going rate, as Europe appears to be resigning itself to that figure with Washington.

That could prove to be positive for Canada. 

Assuming the USMCA preferred treatment remains intact, Canada seems poised to garner a ‘best-in-class’ access to the U.S. market. A possible weighted-average effective tariff rate of 2-3% is attractive both in absolute and comparative terms, assuming a 15% universal tariff rate on only 10%-20% of non-compliant USMCA trade. Essentially that’s similar to most-favoured nation tariff rates (traditionally 2.5%).

In a week when Prime Minister Carney met with the Premiers, our Head of Thought Leadership Jordan Brennan reached out to Trevor Tombe, at the University of Calgary’s School of Public Policy, to discuss interprovincial trade barriers—and Trump.

Q: How much are interprovincial trade barriers costing Canada?
A: My research with collaborators suggests that Canada’s economy could increase by between 4.4% and 7.9% over the long-term—a gain of between $110 and $200 billion per year—if internal trade barriers are eliminated through mutual recognition policies. In specific sectors like trucking, these barriers add approximately 8.3% to freight rates, inflating business costs and reducing overall productivity. The smaller and generally lower income provinces, especially in Atlantic Canada, stand to gain far more than other provinces.

Q: What do you think the likely economic outcome of Bill C-5 will be?
A: Bill C-5 represents a significant federal effort to address internal trade barriers. However, we should be cautious about immediate GDP impacts. The $200-billion growth figure cited by some represents the upper end of estimates and assumes a massive levelling of trade barriers far beyond anything currently proposed. The real gains will come if provinces reciprocate with their own mutual recognition legislation, but we’re seeing considerable momentum in that regard.

Q: Prime Minister Carney seems to believe that removing internal trade barriers will offset the economic harm associated with Trump’s tariffs. How realistic is this belief?
A: The magnitude of interprovincial trade costs is larger than the costs of U.S. tariff disruptions but would take far longer to manifest. Over time, we could potentially more than compensate, but internal trade liberalization is not a sufficient short-term offset for immediate economic disruption.

Canada’s supply management has caught the eye of the Trump administration, again. Critics from south of the border are zeroing in on import quotas specifically for dairy products.

  • Canada’s supply management system is governed through import quotas, producer set prices, and production quotas for dairy, eggs, and poultry–a policy to guarantee farmers’ domestic market share and fair prices for products relative to farm inputs.

  • Import quotas are intended to limit imports within Canada’s supply management industries. In recent trade negotiations, however, Canada has made greater concessions. For example, in the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP) negotiations, Canada agreed to provide participating countries with an estimated 3.25% of Canada’s domestic dairy market.

  • As Canada-U.S.-Mexico-Agreement (CUSMA), the Canada-European Union Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) and CPTPP are phased in over the next 10 years, Canadian foreign market access is expected to climb to roughly 10% of Canada’s dairy production.

  • But as Canadian processors hold most tariff import quotas, foreign importers have argued that they have limited access to Canada’s markets to fulfill their non-tariffed trade volumes negotiated in the agreement.

RBC Thought Leadership’s latest report, Supply Management Explained, explores the benefits and drawbacks of the system and its role in trade wars.

Canada and the U.S. ramped up their commodity exports over the past decade, as both countries leverage their resource riches. The latest report from UN Trade and Development (UNCTAD) shows the two countries—comprising ‘Northern America’—raised their combined commodity exports to 13.1% of the global total by 2023, from 10.8% a decade ago. Other regions barely grew or lost market share during the period.

Commodity concentration: Canadian commodity exports—energy, mining and agriculture, as defined by UNCTAD—accounted for 55.8% of its total commodity exports in 2021-23, compared to 53.3% between 2012-14. The U.S. has become even more reliant: the three commodities made up 35.5% of all American commodity exports during the period, up from 29.5%. As both have earmarked energy, ag and mining as export priorities, they could become more dependent on the three commodities—and their price volatility.

Agriculture rising: For Canada, agriculture was able to grow its export market share from 14.7% to 16.7%, with energy, at 17.4%, up only marginally. For the U.S., it was all about the shale evolution and LNG revolution.

Commodity contraction: Globally, commodity exports now account for 32.7% of all international trade in value terms, down from 35.5% a decade earlier.

Strive to diversify. Countries mainly exporting raw materials could miss out on the broader benefits of global trade, driven by diversification, innovation and value-added production. While that UNCTAD warning was directed at developing countries, it should not be lost on Canadian businesses looking to expand mining, energy and agriculture sectors.

“It’s not our objective to have an agreement at any cost.”

Prime Minister Mark Carney on negotiations with the U.S.


Contributors: Jordan Brennan, Shaz Merwat, Lisa Ashton, Reid Mckay, Yadullah Hussain, Caprice Biasoni

Language Flag Filename

rbc_language_toggle_menu_flag

In this week’s edition: Four potential global trade scenarios, Canada’s agri-food rebound, and why copper is in the crosshairs

By Jordan Brennan, Head of Thought Leadership

What if the U.S. is no longer at the centre of the global trading system? That was one of the ideas explored at a Fields Institute-hosted roundtable I attended this week in Toronto.

The U.S. has wielded tremendous soft power through its custody of the global trading system for the better part of 80 years. That came to an end on April 2nd with President Trump’s ‘Liberation Day’ tariffs, according to one speaker. The speaker went on to claim that the end of American leadership would beget four possible scenarios:

  • World War Trade. This is a 1930s-style scenario where other countries follow the U.S. in ignoring WTO policies. Unless resolved in the coming weeks, Trump’s tariffs will likely provoke retaliatory tariffs from other countries in a tit-for-tat escalation. In one scenario, the trigger is Chinese retaliation against the anti-China provisions the U.S. is seeking from trading partners (e.g., the U.S.-U.K. deal attempts to lock China out of critical supply chains). This nightmarish scenario, thankfully, is the least likely.

  • Managed multi-lateral drift. This is the current base case. The world sees more protectionism from the U.S. and more liberalization everywhere else. The U.S. stands alone in violating the WTO rules, but everyone else plays nice. 

  • Fighting trade blocs. Further geo-political fragmentation leads to the creation of adversarial trade blocs. Within the blocs, there is some measure of cooperation and openness. Between the blocs, we see WTO non-compliance. Three main blocs will form: a U.S.-centric bloc with Canada and Mexico, a pan-European bloc, and a China-led bloc. Japan is a wildcard.

  • Re-globalization without America. This is the most likely scenario. The U.S. will become a more closed economy, trading less with the world. Given that the U.S. only accounts for 15% of global trade, this is not fatal to the international trading system.

It’s not clear what these scenarios would mean for Canada. With more than 75% of our merchandise exports headed to our American neighbours, it is difficult to imagine a future in which the U.S. does not remain Canada’s largest and most important trading partner.

It is possible, strangely, that Canada’s position with the United States is strengthened on a relative basis, given that U.S. tariffs on Canada may end up being considerably lower than those on America’s EU and Asian trading partners. Canada could end up trading more with the United States, not less, despite the tariffs.

It’s also possible, again unexpectedly, that foreign direct investment in Canada is strengthened—think auto—as countries that were happy to pay the ~3% most favoured nation tariff rate now face a 25% tariff wall and will therefore look to pick up spare capacity within North America to work around that wall.

What’s clear is that Canada needs a strong ‘Plan B’ and ‘Plan C’ in the current negotiations with President Trump. Free trade with the U.S. is the preferred outcome, but Canada needs a menu of options if we cannot secure a satisfactory deal.

  • Prime Minister Mark Carney acknowledged that a deal with the U.S. isn’t likely to result in the elimination of all tariffs.

  • Trump’s tariffs have raked in nearly US$50 billion for the U.S.—so far.

  • Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum said she and Carney have spoken about Mexico and Canada increasing collaboration around trade.

  • A dozen EU nations are considering so-called anti-coercion instrument, that could include new taxes on big U.S. tech firms or investment restrictions, if a deal with the U.S. isn’t struck by Aug. 1.

Canada’s agri-food exports rebounded in May after plunging in April, with meat and seafood exports leading the way. New Statistics Canada merchandise trade data shows meat exports were up 13% in May—largely spurred by pork exports to Japan—while packaged seafood splashed up to 52.9% after a year-long decline.

Why that matters?

  • Commodities travel the path of least resistance, but adjustments can take time. Thanks to the CPTPP, Japan’s duty on Canadian fresh, chilled or frozen pork of 4.3% is gradually phasing out by April 2027, specifically for products that are “over-gate,” which is Japan’s minimum pricing system for all pork imports. Processed products like sausages that faced tariffs of up to 10% pre-CPTPP, are now fully phased out. Canadian prepared and preserved swine meat, including lunch meat, to the U.S. dropped from $4 million in January to $2.4 million in May, while the same category of exports to Japan rose from $3.2 million in January to $8 million in May.

  • Canada’s agri-food trade diversification efforts may not be that diversified, yet. The U.S. remains an important partner, especially for highly perishable products like greenhouse tomatoes. Yet, Canada’s agri-food exporters for many categories are on the move and looking to grow in markets where access is already strong, and logistics are in place, including Japan, Mexico, and South Korea. Further unlocks could be markets on the edges with high growth potential for Canada driven by expanded market access. For example, Columbia and Taiwan, both outside of Canada’s top 5 markets for beef and veal export, have grown in export value by 236% and 57%, respectively, between May 2024 and 2025.

Bottom line: With a tariff-free North America looking more unlikely, Canada continues to diversify its agri-food trading partners and appears to be focused on growing in existing tariff-free or low-tariff markets.

84

Percentage of Canadians who don’t expect the Trump administration to negotiate in good faith.

Copper is now a target of the Trump Administration’s AI-centered energy and resource security agenda, where the commodity’s utility as an electrical conductor makes it a priority for the transformers, transmission lines, and battery technologies that will underpin the buildout of AI infrastructure. By the end of the month copper imports into the U.S. could face 50% tariffs, the latest metal to become front and centre in a realignment of resource supply chains.

  • The U.S. imported 42% of its refined copper on average in the past four years. But with 5% of global reserves, there is scope to expand domestic production.

  • Canada occupies a relatively small share of global copper refining, responsible for 1.2% of refinery production in 2024, and approximately 0.8% of reserves.

  • Canada is a major supplier of copper to the U.S. in the form of ore and concentrate, refined copper, copper scrap, and copper matte and precipitate, and exports to Asia and Europe. Canadian exports to the U.S. were worth $4.8 billion in 2023.

  • The effect of the copper tariffs will be felt less in some provinces. B.C., for instance, hosts Canada’s largest copper mines but doesn’t export significantly to the U.S. But others could be more susceptible. Quebec hosts a copper smelter and a refinery and accounted for 80% of copper exports to the U.S. in 2024, according to data from Innovation, Science, and Economic Development Canada.

  • Canadian mines produced 508,000 tonnes of copper in 2023, and the country counted 14 copper deposits among its top 100 mineral exploration projects in 2024. Expanding Canada’s reserve base and bringing more Canadian copper to market, whether at home or abroad, will be important for achieving our energy and AI ambitions.    

Africa has long been a battleground for the China and the U.S. as they vie for economic and trade influence in the continent. The competition has only intensified as the two countries seek access to minerals, from gold to graphite. The U.S. is trying to break Chinese sway in the continent by brokering a peace between Rwanda and the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC). Washington also recently wrapped up a U.S.-Africa Business Summit with US$2.5-billion investment commitment, that included US$1.5 billion towards a 1,150-kilometre transmission line from Angola to deliver 1.2 gigawatt electricity to power DRC mining sites. In return, the U.S. gets access to DRC’s natural resources that include two-thirds of global cobalt that power EV batteries. It’s also the largest supplier of tantalum–a critical metal used in capacitors–and the world’s second largest supplier of copper.

Africa could prove to be a new, thriving trading destination as Ottawa casts its export net wider. There are opportunities abound:

  • Canada-Africa trade has tripled over the past 25 years, but still accounts for a mere 1% of Canada’s total trade volume.

  • Canada could sell cleantech to a continent that remains heavily dependent on coal, especially in growing economies like South Africa. May be LNG, too.

  • Canada can also export mining equipment and clean extraction methods in resource-rich African nations.

  • Health-tech and pharma services could also boost digital health services, especially in the continent’s underserved regions. Edu-tech exports to a continent with the world’s youngest population could prove to be another winner.

  • Africa’s critical minerals supplies offer diverse range of inputs to EV battery supply chains, offering analternative to Chinese-controlled resources. 

“We’ve been clear from the get-go that supply management is off the table.”

François-Philippe Champagne, Canada’s Finance Minister, on the protections in place on dairy and agriculture not being part of the U.S/Canada negotiations. 

Language Flag Filename

rbc_language_toggle_menu_flag

In this week’s edition: Trump’s 35% tariff threat, Canada seeks partners across the Pacific, and the Canadian chocolatier that’s benefitting from the U.S. boycott.

We seem to be in the Wild Wild West as Donald Trump’s latest 35% tariff threat against Canada disregards the July 21 deadline and disrupts the behind-closed-door negotiations underway.

The new deadline is August 1, by which date Canada has been asked to address several U.S. trade irritants, including supply management and the flow of fentanyl across the border. CUSMA-compliant goods crossing the border will “most likely” be exempt, said one U.S. official, in a volley of trade attacks on friends and foes alike that’s designed to confound and confuse—and lead to capitulation.

The latest threats from Washington have spurred the federal and provincial governments to look for new avenues of growth, seek new partners—east and west—, and rev up the dormant interprovincial trade engine.

Some Canadian policymakers were looking to do just that at the Calgary Stampede this week. The Greatest Outdoor Show on Earth, as it’s called, has become a blend of rodeo, carnival, and business fair, pulling in a million people a year.

Mark Carney and Pierre Poilievre were there, along with a gaggle of premiers and senior ministers. Ontario’s Doug Ford brought six cabinet members as he pushes ahead with his domestic trade agenda.

Here’s some of what’s at play as Canada looks for new trade streams:

  • A $100B energy package: Alberta and Ottawa are making progress on a big energy package that could include an oil pipeline to the West Coast, the Pathways project to capture carbon emissions, and room for expanded oil production. The Pipeline + Pathways package has a lot of political punch, but headline costs could be sobering. Add in the costs of expanding production, and the sticker could reach $100 billion. Now, that’s an investment over many years designed to deliver a multiple of that in economic growth and government revenue. But anything of that magnitude will require an explainer-in-chief.

  • New corridors: Pancake-flipping Ford and Alberta’s Danielle Smith also agreed to a feasibility study of new pipelines and rail lines between the two provinces, pledged to increase interprovincial trade of alcohol and vehicles, and push for nuclear energy development.

  • Pacific partners: International investors are very interested in Canada, as a relatively safe alternative to much of the world, including the U.S. But Japan and India wants to see action on regulatory reform, and more investment in export infrastructure. The biggest question is how quickly Canada can move on Indigenous consent for major projects.

  • Megaproject port side. ThePort of Vancouver is looking to boost its total capacity by 70% through the proposed Roberts Bank Terminal 2 Project. Canada’s main gateway has begun looking for a contractor to build the $3-billion project to boost trade with Asia.

A lot is at stake, and the country doesn’t have much time.

  • A federal red-tap review is under way to weed out rules that impede internal trade and business investments. Cabinet ministers are also being asked to find ambitious spending cuts amid Ottawa-wide belt-tightening.

  • Canadian firms, such as Purdys Chocolatiers, are reporting brisk domestic business as the U.S. brand boycott persists in the country.

  • Global trade surged in the first half of 2025, but slowing global economic growth pose risks for trade in the latter half, the UN warns.

  • President Donald Trump’s trade threats and actions now extend to copper, pharmaceuticals and Brazil. Around 14 countries also received tariff missives with the President’s classic sign-off: “Thank you for your attention to this matter!”

  • A cavalcade of small U.S. businesses and interest groups are filing cases against Trump’s litany of tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act.

Multilateral cooperation is a delicate balancing act at the best of times. For half a century, the G7 skillfully juggled competing interests and represented the values of liberal openness, democratic governance, and pluralistic tolerance on the world stage. But with President Trump firing tariff missiles in all directions, including G7 partners, the BRICS+ bloc, seen as an emerging market counterweight to the G7, is quietly emerging as an attractive alternative for some nations.

The 11-nation group met in Rio de Janeiro last weekend. And while some have argued that the bloc lacks any basis for unity or cohesion apart from antipathy to the G7, the geo-economic coalition’s rising influence cannot be denied.

  • Formed in 2009, the bloc initially included Brazil, Russia, India and China, but now encompasses South Africa, Egypt, Ethiopia, Indonesia, Iran, and the UAE, with Saudi Arabia mulling over its membership. Together these countries account for more than a third of global GDP and nearly half of the world’s population. As a trading bloc, the BRICS+ eclipsed the G7 in merchandise exports in 2021, accounting for 30% of the global total.

  • Will Trump’s tariff war accelerate the G7’s relative decline? And will the BRICS+ be able to re-orient trade flows, proving to be a more influential voice for non-Western countries in multilateral governance? It’s too early to tell.

  • But the U.S. is already worried, with Trump threatening tariffs on countries aligning themselves with what he calls the bloc’s “Anti-American policies.”

  • Will Canada get swept up in the U.S.-BRICS cross-currents? Ottawa is already looking to reset ties with China and India—two founding members of BRICS. Foreign Affairs Minister Anita Anand, who is currently in Asia, says Canada is looking to wrap up free trade agreements with Southeast Asian nations—as soon as possible—, several of which are likely BRICS membership candidates.

  • As the Canadian government seeks relief from Trump’s tariff blitz, a longer-term trade strategy confronts the diminished status of G7 nations. How members of the BRICS+ fits into Canada’s trade future remains unknown, especially as Ottawa wants to avoid giving Washington any ammunition to blow up their fragile trade negotiations.

After decades of a unipolar world, the return of a multi-polar world is complicating Canada’s efforts to seek new trading partners.

11,000

The increase in the number of Canada’s trade-dependent manufacturing sector in June. Overall, the ecomony created 83,000 jobs, a figure that surprised analysts given the uncertainty around trade and investments.

As the North American auto industry reels under the weight of U.S. tariffs, the real story on autos may not be in Washington, but in Shenzhen, where Chinese electric vehicle (EV) behemoth BYD’s headquarters are located.

Ford CEO Jim Farley has been the most vocal about the need to “humbly accept” Chinese leadership in EV technology. The executive even imported Chinese EVs recently to test their build quality. Canada and the U.S. remain the only two major nations with no consumer access to Chinese vehicles—the U.S. imposes an almost 150% duty on new Chinese EV imports and Canada has a 100% tax—but Chinese cars are widely expected to come to North American shores at some point.

The almost-overnight success of BYD, which has ramped up production to four million units in just four years, is notable. The automaker surpassed Tesla last year as the world’s largest EV seller. BYD’s patented Blade battery is considered to be among the world’s safest and most affordable, while its autonomous driving system is deemed to be as good as, if not better than, Tesla’s. Most stunning? BYD’s EVs come at bargain prices—on average US$20,000 (C$27,400), less than half the cost of a new North American vehicle.

Whatdoes China’s enhanced automotive industrial capacity portend for Canada’s auto industry, which has been under strain for the better part of two decades? Provincial and federal governments invested heavily in the EV value chain, but with stalling EV sales (9% of total sales in Q1, 2025, compared to 18% in Q4, 2024) and paused or postponed production facilities (Honda, BASF, Northvolt to name a few), the soundness of Canada’s EV bet is being questioned. Pressure on Ottawa from some automakers to scrap the EV mandate could be another body blow to the nascent industry.

One thing seems certain: Americans, Canadians and Mexicans fighting with each other over auto production will not catalyze innovation—it would only accelerate China’s global EV lead.

Trade irritant, stable, costly, secure — these are just a few of the words currently being used to describe Canada’s supply management system, underscoring the renewed debate it’s attracting.

Supply management has faced scrutiny during nearly every major trade negotiation and economic downturn — and it’s poised to be a key discussion point in next year’s Canada-U.S.-Mexico Agreement (CUSMA) review.

The debate is no longer confined within agriculture’s siloed walls. Supply management touches many corners of Canada’s economy: from food prices and consumer choice to supply-chain jobs, trade diversification, and economic growth.

In RBC Thought Leadership’s latest report, Supply Management Explained, we take a closer look at the system’s benefits and drawbacks.

Read the full report here.

“We’ll fight against it. Period.”— Canada’s Trade Minister Melanie Joly, responding to Donald Trump’s threat to impose 50% tariffs on imported copper.

Language Flag Filename

rbc_language_toggle_menu_flag

In this week’s edition: Prime Minister Mark Carney has marked his own red circle in the calendar: July 21; and what the latest trade data tells us about Canada’s export diversification strategy

After Independence Day comes Liberation Day 2.0

Happy 249th Birthday, America! Enjoy the fireworks over the long weekend, but markets are bracing for the more consequential American spectacle on July 9 when the 90-day pause on Liberation Day tariffs comes to an end. Will there be more pyrotechnics or a fizzle out?

The White House’s “90 deals in 90 days” ambition has turned into two American humble-pie, kinda partial deals with the U.K. and China, and another with Vietnam this week.
Will President Donald Trump extend the ceasefire, or will he launch a fresh volley of tariffs against allies like Japan, the EU and Canada?

“About 10 to 12 countries are very close to a deal,” said Joseph Lavorgna, an advisor to U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, with another 20 negotiating in good faith. “And Secretary Bassett highlighted that many deals could be done by Labor Day.” Is that a tell that the administration is looking to push past July 9? Who knows.

While Canada has an eye on that date, Prime Minister Carney has marked his own red circle in the calendar: the July 21 deadline to conclude a security and economic deal with the U.S. To facilitate talks, Ottawa scrapped its digital services tax on Big Tech, which was an irritant to President Trump. Canada is now back in the “front of the line” in trade negotiations, assured Pete Hoekstra, U.S. Ambassador to Canada.

Strategically, it’s an open question if Canada is better off rushing to negotiate a bilateral deal with the U.S. or defer until the autumn. In such serial negotiations, first movers often set the pattern, so there may be an advantage to rush a deal with Trump. On the other hand, the president desperately wants the Federal Reserve to cut interest rates, which would lower interest payments on America’s ballooning public debt, lower debt-servicing costs and galvanize economic activity. Jerome Powell, Chairman of the Federal Reserve, is holding firm on rate cuts until the trade turmoil settles down. Come autumn, we will be in a countdown to midterm elections, which will put pressure on Trump to rev up America’s economic engine. Canada may be better off waiting until public pressure on Trump mounts. That is, if its own trade and economic data holds up.

While Trump recently said his administration has “all the cards” in its negotiations with Ottawa, Carney has a few aces up his sleeve, too.

  • Energy. Oil, natural gas, and electricity, etc.—Canada has it in abundance. The U.S. needs them all to help power its data centres and, presumably, an industrial revival.

  • Uranium. Canada, the world’s second largest producerof uranium,would need to figure prominently to power Trump’s plan to start construction of 10 large nuclear reactors by 2030, and expand U.S. nuclear energy from 100 gigawatt currently to 400GW by 2050.

  • Big Tech. Ottawa has just pulled its 3% digital services tax (that’s $3 billion in forgone revenue), gaining goodwill while keeping the option to re‑table it if talks stall.

  • Critical minerals. Canada produces or refines 21 of the 50 U.S.‑listed critical minerals—developing capacity at Saskatchewan’s new rare‑earth plant and Ontario’s Ring of Fire are poised to cement Canadian leadership in responsible critical minerals.

  • Counter‑firepower. A choice of last resort given potential costs for Canadian businesses, Finance Canada can mirror U.S. moves with tariffs on up to $155 billion of U.S. goods—a list was already drafted in February.

  • Friend‑shoring pitch. A bilateral supply‑chain roadmap under previous administrations argue deeper North‑American integration—EV batteries, semiconductors, green steel—as the surest hedge against both Chinese dominance and tariff chaos.

  • Supply management. Some agriculture and dairy concessions may be on the table as a compromise, as Ottawa finds a balance between appeasing Washington without upsetting the domestic audience.

The week that was

  • The Great Canadian booze boycott sent imports of U.S. alcohol plummeting 94% year-on-year to just $3 million in April. Some U.S. officials see removal of the boycott as part of the trade deal.

  • Ottawa scrapped all 53 federal exemptions in the Canadian Free Trade Agreement that were impeding interprovincial trade, just in time for Canada Day. Good, now dismantle the patchwork of provincial barriers, the Canadian Federation of Independent Businesses recommends.

  • Republicans killed the “revenge tax” from the so-called Big, Beautiful bill that passed yesterday. It was scrapped after G7 countries agreed to exempt the U.S. from an OECD-proposed global minimum tax—raising questions about the pact’s global-ness.

  • Speaking of free passes, the EU is proposing to exempt its steel and other heavy industries from its carbon border tax exports in the face of competition from foreign rivals.

  • Global LNG vessel deliveries shot up 60% to 67 units last year, taking the global fleet to 831, as LNG trade booms. Another 103 vessels are set to be delivered this year.

The big number

Windsor’s unemployment rate in May, as Ontario’s key auto-assembly hub reels from U.S. tariffs. The province’s overall unemployment rate stands at 7.9%.

Current trade sentiment: Diversify—and dread

Canada is recalibrating its international trade flows in response to U.S. tariffs, new Statistics Canada data shows. Following heavy drops in exports in April, there are some signs of a shift, but the outlook remains uncertain for Canadian industries. Most of the strategic sectors—iron, aluminum, lumber and pharmaceuticals—, that Trump has marked as strategic to the U.S. economy, saw declines.

  • On the bright side, exports edged up: Canada’s record $7.6 billion merchandise trade deficit in April narrowed to $5.9 billion in May, with overall exports up 1.1%, led by gold. Imports fell 1.6%.

  • But U.S.-bound trade continued to shrink. Tariff-induced declines in Canadian exports continued a four-month decline, dropping 0.9% in May.

  • The diversification drive is on. Canada is beginning to increase its exports to non-U.S. markets, which rose 5.7% in May—a record.

  • Tariff-hit sectors bore the brunt. May saw little relief among key sectors, following major export reductions in April. Exports of unwrought iron, steel, and aluminum alloys and products dropped 4.9% since April. Exports of lumber and sawmill products also declined 2.2%, while pharmaceutical fell 0.5%. However, motor vehicles and part exports rose 0.9%.

  • Lumber is staring down the barrel of steeper duties. Canadian softwood lumber exports to the U.S. could see duties jumping from 14.5% to 34.45% in July, unless a deal can be hashed out.

    CEOs of auto manufacturers met with Carney this week to discuss ways to protect the auto  supply chains from the trade war, and diversify trade relationships. And while Canada’s imposition of temporary tariff-rate quotas on steel mill products could provide short-term relief to domestic producers, several industries await more trade clarity.

    Also read: $125B Exposed: What’s at risk for Canada as Trump eyes 5 strategic sectors

Final Word

Canada is a “very difficult country to TRADE with, including the fact that they have charged our Farmers as much as 400% Tariffs, for years, on Dairy Products,”—U.S. President Donald Trump, as he takes aim at Canada’s supply management system.

Language Flag Filename

rbc_language_toggle_menu_flag

Oh Canada, we’ve got ourselves a deal

  • At long last, and just in time for Canada Day, the federal government is taking steps to tear down interprovincial trade barriers.

  • Bill C-5, the Free Trade and Labour Mobility in Canada Act, has become law. And while removing federal barriers to interprovincial trade is a positive step, history suggests obstacles will remain.

  • ‘Special interests’ groups will mobilize behind the scenes to secure carve-outs from the legislation, which may undermine its effectiveness.

  • More challenging still is the commercial reality on the ground. As Canada’s experience in free trade shows, the mere lowering of tariff walls does not automatically boost trade flows. Canada liberalized trade with Europe and Asia, for example, but Canadian exports to these regions have not meaningfully increased.

  • So can we expect to see more Okanagan Riesling on shelves east of the Rockies? It’s probably too early to pop the cork and celebrate that victory.

  • Statistics Canada data shows that Canadians trade less with each other than they do with the rest of the world, in percentage terms. In the ’80’s, roughly half of Canada’s total trade was interprovincial. Following a series of FTAs, that proportion has dipped closer to a third.

  • Internal barriers may help explain why trade between provinces has lagged trade with the wider world. RBC Economics concluded earlier this year that estimates may differ about the economic gains associated with reducing internal trade barriers, but what seems certain is that free trade among the provinces is a pro-growth policy—particularly for the smaller provinces.

The week that was

  • In addition to having her term as Canada’s Ambassador to the U.S. extended, Kirsten Hillman was named Canada’s chief negotiator in trade talks with the U.S.

  • Complaints from U.S. manufacturers that China was limiting the release of rare-earth elements despite its trade truce with Washington prompted Beijing to promise on Friday that it would approve U.S applications. This comes a day after Trump announced that the U.S. and China had “just signed” a deal.

  • The U.K. unveiled a broader trade strategy focused on its £500 billion a year service exports sector and the desire to land deals with a range of partners, including the six-member Gulf Cooperation Council.

  • Trump threatened Spain with increased tariffs, after Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez rejected NATO’s new target of spending 5% of GDP on defence.

  • Donald Trump, at the urging of oil executives, is pushing to rollback climate laws as part of U.S.-EU trade negotiations.

The big number

Total value of U.S. exports in May, down 5.2% versus April – that’s the sharpest month-over-month decline since 2000

Global oil and gas trade just got risky—again

As Iran and Israel traded missiles and the U.S. bombed three of Tehran’s nuclear facilities, oil tanker rate premiums spiked 83%. And with major LNG exporter Qatar briefly getting ensnared in the crisis, another element of risk was added to the global oil and gas trade.

While oil tanker rates cooled off a couple days after the ceasefire, this volatility could remain a perennial issue hovering over global commodity production—and prices. Meanwhile, LNG tanker rates, due to re-routing and summer demand, remain elevated. By 2030, almost 25% of global LNG flows are expected to pass through the Strait of Hormuz, a critical oil and gas channel in the Middle East, based on Rystad data.

Canada has an opportunity to help de-risk global supply from both a geopolitical and a concentration of supply standpoint—a proposition valued by European and Asian buyers, as we highlighted in our recent report A G7+ Strategy for Natural Gas: Four Scenarios for Energy Security in the 2040s.

And Canada would soon become a bona fide member of the LNG exporters club.This weekend, LNG Canada awaits the arrival of likely two LNG carriers, including Puteri Sejinjang, a new 174,000-cubic-metre carrier, to pick up the first-ever shipment of gas from the West Coast facility.

Final Word

“Our strategic response to this new world can’t be based on nostalgia or post-imperial delusion, let alone any ideological or dogmatic attachment to one trading bloc or another.”
Douglas Alexander, U.K.’s Trade Minister

Language Flag Filename

rbc_language_toggle_menu_flag

In this week’s edition: A critical minerals action plan, why trade diversification may not be a silver bullet and how tariffs are making food insecurity even worse

Noteworthy

By John Stackhouse

Mark Carney got out of the G7 alive. The Kananaskis summit could have been a trade wreck, but Donald Trump clearly had other things on his mind. That doesn’t mean Canada, or any of the other summiteers, can claim victory. Here’s why, and some of what we’re hearing: 

  • There was never going to be a Canada-U.S. agreement at the G7, for one simple reason: DJT was not going to announce something so important to his domestic agenda on foreign soil (unless, of course, he planted the Stars and Stripes with it.)

  • The ensuing suggestion of a 30-day window for a deal is aspirational. Anyone who has dealt with Trump knows he doesn’t stick to deadlines, and he uses time as a negotiating tool. That means don’t settle if you don’t have to. And now, the Carney team’s biggest concern is playing out, as POTUS gets distracted by events. A Middle East war, for instance.

  • Some on the Canadian side don’t mind that, thinking that a “rag the puck” strategy allows Canada to get to a fuller USMCA conversation in the fall.

  • But still other Canadians fear the worsening impact of countervailing tariffs. “Elbows up” sounds fine, until you elbow someone on your own team. Plain + simple: Canada is suffering more from the tariff war than the U.S. right now.

  • And the longer the uncertainty goes on, the more challenging it will be for Canada to attract investment.

  • Longer term, Canada remains in the crosshairs of Trump’s sectoral studies, which will only make it harder for our exports in his Core 5 categories: autos, steel/aluminum, lumber, pharmaceuticals and semiconductors.

  • As someone put it to Trade Zone: “When your negotiating partner is willing to be far more ruthless, you’re not in a good negotiating position.”

The week that was

  • The U.S. and Canada are looking to secure a deal within 30 days. If they can’t, Carney said, Canada will impose counter-tariffs.

  • Canada is cracking down on the dumping of cheap foreign steel to support domestic steel producers getting hammered by Trump’s 50% tariffs.

  • The volume of commercial trucks crossing into the U.S. from Canada is down more than 10% in each of the past two months compared to 2024. Meanwhile, trucks from Mexico to the U.S. were only down 2.8% in May (and 6.4% lower in April).

  • The U.K.’s Business Secretary said that efforts to get relief for steel exports to the U.S. will be wrapped into broader tariff negotiations, indicating that there is still a ways to go on the recently announced trade deal between the U.S. and U.K.

  • The U.S. Fed held rates steady and said it will watch the impact of tariffs closely this summer.

  • Housing starts in the U.S. hit a five-year low in May as tariffs hit imported construction materials.

  • Despite tariffs effectively shutting the U.S. out as a destination for its goods, China increased its overall trade surplus to US$500 billion so far this year—that’s up 40% YoY.

Minerals on the G7’s mind

G7 leaders unveiled a Critical Minerals Action Plan this week to counter non-market distortions, increase supply chain transparency, and reduce strategic dependency on Beijing. While light on specifics, some key items aligned with our report, The New Great Game:

  • Limit price distortions: G7 members committed to coordinated responses to supply disruptions and pledged improved market transparency and traceability. No explicit mention of a “China premium” or minimum price floor, as we noted, but positive developments, nonetheless.

  • Unlock financing: Encourage development banks, export credit agencies, and private capital to accelerate upstream investment in G7 countries and emerging market allies.

  • Supply-chain traceability, standard-setting and sustainability: A G7 roadmap due by year-end to create benchmarks to ensure responsible mining, environmental safeguards and labour standards.

Canada remains positioned as a central actor in mineral resources, with the potential to serve the growing needs of European and U.S. defence and new energy mineral needs—a natural advantage in trade talks with the U.S. and partners. Further efforts to strengthen the remainder of the value chain—building out refining capacity, for example—will complement Canada’s resource advantage.

Why trade diversification may not be a silver bullet

Diversifying trade partners, in the wake of the current trade war with the U.S., has become a hot topic. But while lowering tariff barriers is sound economics, this alone may not lead to higher export volumes.

The Harper conservatives pursued bilateral trade agreements with a range of countries and economic blocs, including Europe (CETA), Asia-Pacific (CPTPP), and a host of Latin American countries. And yet, just 4% of Canadian exports are EU-bound and 6% are shipped to CPTPP countries—ratios that remain unmoved over two decades.

Meanwhile, nearly 80% of Canadian exports are sent to the U.S. Canada’s reliance on a few key industries—energy, automotive and metals—further entrenches this dependence. Canada needs an integrated trade strategy that diversifies trading partners while boosting export competitiveness. And it makes the Carney-Trump 30-day deal deadline all the more important.

A trade war on food security

One in four Canadians are experiencing food insecurity—a level never seen before in this country. It’s an issue of affordability, and one that tariffs and the ongoing trade uncertainty, threatens to make worse.

  • Job loss and insecurity is forcing many to make difficult choices: Between January and May, Canada’s manufacturing sector lost 54,000 jobs and the country’s unemployment rate rose to 7%, the highest it’s been since 2016, excluding the pandemic.

  • Rising cost of living threatens to further deepen the food insecurity crisis. But it’s more than about jobs—over 60% of food-insecure households rely on wages or self-employment income to support themselves.

  • Supply chain disruptions impact food consistency and costs: In the U.S., tariffs are estimated to increase food prices by 2.6% in the short run, disproportionately impacting fruit and vegetables, that are expected to rise 5.4%.

In our latest report–Feeding the Crisis: The Tariff Toll on Food Insecurity–we lay out three potential solutions, all linked to Canada’s growth ambitions.

The Final Word

“If the current tariffs and counter-tariffs remain in place, past experience suggests pass through of about 75% of the costs of tariffs over roughly a year and a half.”
Bank of Canada Governor Tiff Macklem during a speech this week in St. John’s, Newfoundland.