Donald Trump mainly invoked the public health crisis caused by fentanyl and illicit drugs to justify an increase in prices from 25 to 35 %.
“Canada has not cooperated to stem the continuous influx of Fentanyl and other illicit drugs, and it has exerted reprisals against the United States due to the measures taken by the president to face this unusual and extraordinary threat that weighs on the United States,” said a note shared by the White House.
“The United States has said it had taken its latest commercial measure in response to fentanyl cross-border traffic, although only 1 % of fentanyl imports in the United States come from Canada and the latter is making considerable efforts to further reduce these volumes,” Mark Carney notably replied, a few hours after the American announcement.
As a reminder, for more security on the border, Canada had also appointed Kevin Brosseau in February as Tsar du Fentanyl.
“Better not to conclude in agreement rather than concluding an unfavorable agreement”
In addition, Canadian exports covered by the Canada-US-Mexico (ACEUM) agreement are exempt from these prices. But, “other sectors of our economy, including wood wood, steel, aluminum and cars, are however strongly affected by American customs duties and prices,” said the federal government which “will take measures to protect Canadian jobs, invest in the competitiveness of our industries, promote the purchase of Canadian products and diversify our export markets. »»
Since this American announcement, reactions have been linked to Canada. Business organizations seize the subject.
The FCEI (Canadian Federation of Independent Company) says in particular that “invoking fentanyl as justification is even more ridiculous than the decision to set up prices. »»
“The FCEI maintains the idea that it is better not to conclude in agreement rather than to conclude an unfavorable agreement, but the absence of an agreement means that companies will not be able to adequately plan the future,” also underlined the organization, through Jasmin Guénette, vice-president of national affairs at the FCEI.
Same observation for Candace Laing, president and head of the management of the Canada Chamber of Commerce. “The Carney government is right to give priority to a solid agreement and turned towards the future rather than a precipitated agreement. »»
And if part of the cross -border trade remains to protect thanks to ACEUM, “not all Canadian companies benefit from this advantage and the transition to customs duties of 35 % on products not in accordance with ACEUM requires them an additional charge,” recalls Candace Laing.
Political reactions
Opposition political leaders also reacted to this news.
For the chief of the Quebec Bloc, Yves-François Blanchet, “the concern is important and the need for a real agreement is crucial,” he said.
For the interim leader of the new Democratic Party (NPD), Don Davies, “Mr. Carney knew that his strategy failed. For him, “Canada must continue to put pressure on a solid agreement. »»
Neo-democrats are now expecting investments “in the national manufacturing industry and unionized jobs” or even giving “priority to Canadian content in public projects and offering tax incentives for products manufactured in Canada”, can be read in an official declaration.
Finally Pierre Poilievre, leader of the Conservative Party of Canada, also commented on these commercial negotiations with the United States.
“The conservatives are demanding policies that will allow us to regain control of our economic future by putting an end to our dependence on the United States,” he said.
To achieve this objective, the Conservatives ask “the liberals to repeal their anti-development laws and to reduce taxes on work, energy, investment and residential construction in order to make our economy strong, autonomous and sovereign. »»
