February 22, 2025
U.S. President Donald Trump speaks at the Governors Working Session in the State Dining Room of the White House in Washington, Friday, Feb. 21, 2025. THE CANADIAN PRESS/AP-Pool via AP
OTTAWA — As Canada stares down U.S. President Donald Trump’s repeated threats of devastating tariffs, roughly half of Canadians and Americans believe their countries are in an economic recession right now, a new poll suggests.
The results of the Leger survey — which polled both Canadians and Americans — suggest that Canadian and Americans hold many similar views on the state of the economy and their personal financial status.
The poll also suggests that 39 per cent of Canadians who are currently employed are worried about losing their jobs within the next 12 months — a three-point increase since last month.
Sébastien Dallaire, Leger’s executive vice-president for Eastern Canada, said that the results “add up to a long series of difficult moments.”
The poll was conduced between Feb. 14 and Feb. 17 and surveyed 1,550 Canadians and 1,000 Americans. Because it was conducted online, it can’t be assigned a margin of error.
The survey says that 50 per cent of Canadians and 51 per cent of Americans polled believe that both countries are already in a recession.
Neither country is experiencing a recession right now but the Canadian Chamber of Commerce estimates that Trump’s threatened 25 per cent, across-the-board tariffs would shrink Canada’s economy by $78 billion and push the country into a recession by next summer.
The chamber estimates the U.S. economy would also take a hit of US$467 billion.
The poll suggests that slightly more than half of Canadians — 54 per cent of respondents — consider their household finances to be in good shape.
Another 46 per cent report living from paycheque to paycheque, while 59 per cent of American respondents said the same thing.
Dallaire said that although the United States is a wealthy country with more economic clout than Canada, income inequality is also greater there because its social safety net is less robust.
“The big difference between the two countries is in Canada, you do have more protection, you do have more backup if things go south a little bit, but in the United States it can be much tougher if you’re not able to make ends meet,” he said.
The unemployment rate in Canada stood at 6.6 per cent in January 2025, Statistics Canada reported.
The polling industry’s professional body, the Canadian Research Insights Council, says online surveys cannot be assigned a margin of error because they do not randomly sample the population.
This report by The Canadian Press was first published Feb. 22, 2025.
Jesmeen Gill, The Canadian Press
OTTAWA — As Canada stares down U.S. President Donald Trump’s repeated threats of devastating tariffs, roughly half of Canadians and Americans believe their countries are in an economic recession right now, a new poll suggests.
The results of the Leger survey — which polled both Canadians and Americans — suggest that Canadian and Americans hold many similar views on the state of the economy and their personal financial status.
The poll also suggests that 39 per cent of Canadians who are currently employed are worried about losing their jobs within the next 12 months — a three-point increase since last month.
Sébastien Dallaire, Leger’s executive vice-president for Eastern Canada, said that the results “add up to a long series of difficult moments.”
The poll was conduced between Feb. 14 and Feb. 17 and surveyed 1,550 Canadians and 1,000 Americans. Because it was conducted online, it can’t be assigned a margin of error.
The survey says that 50 per cent of Canadians and 51 per cent of Americans polled believe that both countries are already in a recession.
Neither country is experiencing a recession right now but the Canadian Chamber of Commerce estimates that Trump’s threatened 25 per cent, across-the-board tariffs would shrink Canada’s economy by $78 billion and push the country into a recession by next summer.
The chamber estimates the U.S. economy would also take a hit of US$467 billion.
The poll suggests that slightly more than half of Canadians — 54 per cent of respondents — consider their household finances to be in good shape.
Another 46 per cent report living from paycheque to paycheque, while 59 per cent of American respondents said the same thing.
Dallaire said that although the United States is a wealthy country with more economic clout than Canada, income inequality is also greater there because its social safety net is less robust.
“The big difference between the two countries is in Canada, you do have more protection, you do have more backup if things go south a little bit, but in the United States it can be much tougher if you’re not able to make ends meet,” he said.
The unemployment rate in Canada stood at 6.6 per cent in January 2025, Statistics Canada reported.
The polling industry’s professional body, the Canadian Research Insights Council, says online surveys cannot be assigned a margin of error because they do not randomly sample the population.
This report by The Canadian Press was first published Feb. 22, 2025.
Jesmeen Gill, The Canadian Press
70% of Canadians support retaliatory tariffs on United States: poll
By The Canadian Press
.jpg)
By The Canadian Press
February 21, 2025
OTTAWA — Seventy per cent of Canadians are in favour of dollar-for-dollar retaliatory tariffs on the United States, a new poll suggests.
Nearly half of respondents to the Leger poll — 45 per cent — said they were strongly in favour of such tariffs, while 25 per cent said they were somewhat in favour.
U.S. President Donald Trump has pledged to impose steep tariffs on imports from Canada and other countries.
He has announced plans to implement a number of different tariff measures and signed executive orders to impose 25 per cent tariffs on all steel and aluminum imports starting March 12. Earlier this month, he paused his stated plan to hit Canada and Mexico with 25 per cent across-the-board duties, with a lower 10 per cent levy on Canadian energy.
Trump also has repeatedly pushed the idea that Canada should become a U.S. state and in January threatened to use “economic force” to annex Canada.
Leger reports 81 per cent of respondents said they were worried that Trump would use economic means, including tariffs and trade sanctions, in an attempt to force Canada into a “much closer and more formal union with the United States.”
The poll was conducted between Feb. 14 and Feb. 17 and surveyed 1,500 Canadians. Because it was conducted online, it can’t be assigned a margin of error.
Sébastien Dallaire, Leger’s executive vice-president for Eastern Canada, said the strong support for retaliatory tariffs shows Canadians are angry.
“It speaks to the level of anger on the part of Canadians, that they are willing for the government to take actions that in the end will hurt our pocketbook,” he said, noting retaliatory tariffs might increase prices or make some products less available to consumers.
Most poll respondents said they had cut their purchases of American products, with 63 per cent saying they were buying less in stores and 62 per cent saying they were buying less online.
Just over half — 52 per cent — said they were buying less through Amazon. Half said they had cut down on fast food purchases from American chains and 43 per cent said they were buying less from U.S.-based retail chain stores.
Almost one-third — 30 per cent — of respondents who had a trip planned to the United States said they had cancelled it.
But only 19 per cent of those who subscribe to U.S. streaming services reported cancelling a subscription.
More than two thirds — 68 per cent — said they had increased their purchases of Canadian products.
Dallaire said there are “large proportions of Canadians who are willing to put money where their mouth is.”
“They’re not happy and they’re finding alternative ways to spend their money, trying to support more local products, move away from American products or brands,” he said. “And so it’s a pretty significant movement.”
The polling industry’s professional body, the Canadian Research Insights Council, says online surveys cannot be assigned a margin of error because they do not randomly sample the population.
This report by The Canadian Press was first published Feb. 21, 2024.
Anja Karadeglija, The Canadian Press
OTTAWA — Seventy per cent of Canadians are in favour of dollar-for-dollar retaliatory tariffs on the United States, a new poll suggests.
Nearly half of respondents to the Leger poll — 45 per cent — said they were strongly in favour of such tariffs, while 25 per cent said they were somewhat in favour.
U.S. President Donald Trump has pledged to impose steep tariffs on imports from Canada and other countries.
He has announced plans to implement a number of different tariff measures and signed executive orders to impose 25 per cent tariffs on all steel and aluminum imports starting March 12. Earlier this month, he paused his stated plan to hit Canada and Mexico with 25 per cent across-the-board duties, with a lower 10 per cent levy on Canadian energy.
Trump also has repeatedly pushed the idea that Canada should become a U.S. state and in January threatened to use “economic force” to annex Canada.
Leger reports 81 per cent of respondents said they were worried that Trump would use economic means, including tariffs and trade sanctions, in an attempt to force Canada into a “much closer and more formal union with the United States.”
The poll was conducted between Feb. 14 and Feb. 17 and surveyed 1,500 Canadians. Because it was conducted online, it can’t be assigned a margin of error.
Sébastien Dallaire, Leger’s executive vice-president for Eastern Canada, said the strong support for retaliatory tariffs shows Canadians are angry.
“It speaks to the level of anger on the part of Canadians, that they are willing for the government to take actions that in the end will hurt our pocketbook,” he said, noting retaliatory tariffs might increase prices or make some products less available to consumers.
Most poll respondents said they had cut their purchases of American products, with 63 per cent saying they were buying less in stores and 62 per cent saying they were buying less online.
Just over half — 52 per cent — said they were buying less through Amazon. Half said they had cut down on fast food purchases from American chains and 43 per cent said they were buying less from U.S.-based retail chain stores.
Almost one-third — 30 per cent — of respondents who had a trip planned to the United States said they had cancelled it.
But only 19 per cent of those who subscribe to U.S. streaming services reported cancelling a subscription.
More than two thirds — 68 per cent — said they had increased their purchases of Canadian products.
Dallaire said there are “large proportions of Canadians who are willing to put money where their mouth is.”
“They’re not happy and they’re finding alternative ways to spend their money, trying to support more local products, move away from American products or brands,” he said. “And so it’s a pretty significant movement.”
The polling industry’s professional body, the Canadian Research Insights Council, says online surveys cannot be assigned a margin of error because they do not randomly sample the population.
This report by The Canadian Press was first published Feb. 21, 2024.
Anja Karadeglija, The Canadian Press
Canada can legally challenge tariffs, but will Trump fall in line with the ruling?
February 21, 2025
Rolls of coiled coated steel are shown at Stelco, in Hamilton
THE CANADIAN PRESS/Peter Power
If U.S. President Donald Trump imposes tariffs on Canadian goods as he’s repeatedly threated to do, experts say Canada has a strong case to challenge it under the Canada-U.S.-Mexico free trade agreement.
The question, though, is how quickly any decision may come through the process — and more importantly, whether the U.S. would respect any decisions from the outcome.
“A rules-based system is only as good as the willingness of the government who’s subject to it, to comply with it,” said Wendy Wagner, a partner at Gowling WLG.
The free trade agreement is a nation-to-nation agreement, so there’s no one else to appeal to if a country decides not to respect a decision.
America’s past performance on adhering to trade decisions has been mixed. Areas of contention include complicated measures such as figuring out how much foreign content is in an automobile or the long-running softwood lumber dispute.
What Trump has threatened, though — blanket 25 per cent tariffs on Canadian goods, with the exception of 10 per cent tariffs on energy — doesn’t contain much grey area, said Wendy.
“We’re not arguing around the edges here,” she said.
“There couldn’t be anything more offensive to a free trade agreement than a 25 per cent across-the-board tariff on all the products that originate from that country. It’s the most blatantly antithetical measure that you could impose.”
Enforcing the law
The blatancy of the threatened measures do bring into question whether any ruling through treaty channels will have much impact, Wagner said.
“There’s a larger issue about the extent of adherence to a rules-based system, both internationally and domestically.”
The U.S. has already shown a disregard to findings in the past. When it imposed metal tariffs in 2018 the World Trade Organization ultimately ruled in favour of China that the move wasn’t allowed, but the U.S. refused to comply.
Canada could also decide to challenge this round of tariffs at the WTO, as well as through CUSMA.
Based on the rules of the regional treaty, Canada could launch a challenge which would prompt mandatory consultations between countries within 30 days of filing the complaint.
If there’s no resolution through that step, the next would be to establish a dispute settlement panel. It acts as a sort of tribunal and goes through the process of hearing arguments and evaluating the evidence and produces a report on its findings.
The time it takes to get through a complaint varies, but past cases have generally run around a year to a year and a half, Wagner said.
The complaints process
The dispute panel’s report sets out what the offending country needs to do to fix the trade issue.
If the U.S. didn’t comply, then Canada would be allowed under the system to impose dollar-for-dollar counter measures.
This is something Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has already said the government will do as soon as the U.S. imposes tariffs, but technically Canada will also be in violation of the treaty if it imposes counter-tariffs ahead of the process.
While Canada may have to get ahead of the process to respond given the scale of the threat, it’s still important it goes through the treaty steps to get to the same result, said Clifford Sosnow, a partner at Fasken Martineau DuMoulin.
“Ultimately the result of the (grievance) process is compliance, and if there’s no compliance, retaliation, and so in many ways, you’re back to square one,” he said.
“But symbolically and legally, it has important aspects to it, because it effectively for Canada is an affirmation of the importance of the agreement.”
Going through the process will also force the U.S. to participate and submit to the process. That makes it harder for it to say it’s abandoning the whole treaty, said Sosnow.
“Effectively it creates some stickiness between a president who’s already poorly disposed towards the agreement, and at the same time affirms the legitimacy of the agreement.”
Committing to the treaty
For Canada, following the legal steps also affirms that the legal structure is the way to resolve disputes, he said.
“In other words, a rules-based system as opposed to a power-based system. So there’s both strategic value to this (and) there’s symbolic value to it.”
A U.S. refusal to participate in the process would effectively renounce the whole treaty, a sharp contrast to Trump’s apparent position that he wants a better version of the treaty he originally agreed to when negotiations open up on June 1, 2026.
“It would be effectively a highly, highly controversial, and in fact I would suggest an unprecedented, repudiation of the agreement.”
A full abandoning of the treaty would be much more significant than Trump’s tariffs, which he claims to be doing over national security concerns at the border. While the claims are tenuous at best, Sosnow said, they’re at least still within the framework of the treaty.
“The logic of that is very poor, the logic of that is very weak, but that’s the tenuous connection to the agreement.”
When Trump last imposed tariffs on Canadian steel and aluminum in 2018, the process was resolved through counter-tariffs and diplomacy, not through the treaty process.
The last round had Canada agree to several measures to limit exports of what the U.S. considered subsidized metal, but Sosnow said Trump has made it clear he’s not interested in a measured solution.
“That seemed to mollify the president (in 2018). Right now, the president is saying, ‘I won’t be mollified by that the second time around.’”
This report by The Canadian Press was first published Feb. 21, 2025
Ian Bickis, The Canadian Press
If U.S. President Donald Trump imposes tariffs on Canadian goods as he’s repeatedly threated to do, experts say Canada has a strong case to challenge it under the Canada-U.S.-Mexico free trade agreement.
The question, though, is how quickly any decision may come through the process — and more importantly, whether the U.S. would respect any decisions from the outcome.
“A rules-based system is only as good as the willingness of the government who’s subject to it, to comply with it,” said Wendy Wagner, a partner at Gowling WLG.
The free trade agreement is a nation-to-nation agreement, so there’s no one else to appeal to if a country decides not to respect a decision.
America’s past performance on adhering to trade decisions has been mixed. Areas of contention include complicated measures such as figuring out how much foreign content is in an automobile or the long-running softwood lumber dispute.
What Trump has threatened, though — blanket 25 per cent tariffs on Canadian goods, with the exception of 10 per cent tariffs on energy — doesn’t contain much grey area, said Wendy.
“We’re not arguing around the edges here,” she said.
“There couldn’t be anything more offensive to a free trade agreement than a 25 per cent across-the-board tariff on all the products that originate from that country. It’s the most blatantly antithetical measure that you could impose.”
Enforcing the law
The blatancy of the threatened measures do bring into question whether any ruling through treaty channels will have much impact, Wagner said.
“There’s a larger issue about the extent of adherence to a rules-based system, both internationally and domestically.”
The U.S. has already shown a disregard to findings in the past. When it imposed metal tariffs in 2018 the World Trade Organization ultimately ruled in favour of China that the move wasn’t allowed, but the U.S. refused to comply.
Canada could also decide to challenge this round of tariffs at the WTO, as well as through CUSMA.
Based on the rules of the regional treaty, Canada could launch a challenge which would prompt mandatory consultations between countries within 30 days of filing the complaint.
If there’s no resolution through that step, the next would be to establish a dispute settlement panel. It acts as a sort of tribunal and goes through the process of hearing arguments and evaluating the evidence and produces a report on its findings.
The time it takes to get through a complaint varies, but past cases have generally run around a year to a year and a half, Wagner said.
The complaints process
The dispute panel’s report sets out what the offending country needs to do to fix the trade issue.
If the U.S. didn’t comply, then Canada would be allowed under the system to impose dollar-for-dollar counter measures.
This is something Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has already said the government will do as soon as the U.S. imposes tariffs, but technically Canada will also be in violation of the treaty if it imposes counter-tariffs ahead of the process.
While Canada may have to get ahead of the process to respond given the scale of the threat, it’s still important it goes through the treaty steps to get to the same result, said Clifford Sosnow, a partner at Fasken Martineau DuMoulin.
“Ultimately the result of the (grievance) process is compliance, and if there’s no compliance, retaliation, and so in many ways, you’re back to square one,” he said.
“But symbolically and legally, it has important aspects to it, because it effectively for Canada is an affirmation of the importance of the agreement.”
Going through the process will also force the U.S. to participate and submit to the process. That makes it harder for it to say it’s abandoning the whole treaty, said Sosnow.
“Effectively it creates some stickiness between a president who’s already poorly disposed towards the agreement, and at the same time affirms the legitimacy of the agreement.”
Committing to the treaty
For Canada, following the legal steps also affirms that the legal structure is the way to resolve disputes, he said.
“In other words, a rules-based system as opposed to a power-based system. So there’s both strategic value to this (and) there’s symbolic value to it.”
A U.S. refusal to participate in the process would effectively renounce the whole treaty, a sharp contrast to Trump’s apparent position that he wants a better version of the treaty he originally agreed to when negotiations open up on June 1, 2026.
“It would be effectively a highly, highly controversial, and in fact I would suggest an unprecedented, repudiation of the agreement.”
A full abandoning of the treaty would be much more significant than Trump’s tariffs, which he claims to be doing over national security concerns at the border. While the claims are tenuous at best, Sosnow said, they’re at least still within the framework of the treaty.
“The logic of that is very poor, the logic of that is very weak, but that’s the tenuous connection to the agreement.”
When Trump last imposed tariffs on Canadian steel and aluminum in 2018, the process was resolved through counter-tariffs and diplomacy, not through the treaty process.
The last round had Canada agree to several measures to limit exports of what the U.S. considered subsidized metal, but Sosnow said Trump has made it clear he’s not interested in a measured solution.
“That seemed to mollify the president (in 2018). Right now, the president is saying, ‘I won’t be mollified by that the second time around.’”
This report by The Canadian Press was first published Feb. 21, 2025
Ian Bickis, The Canadian Press
.jpg)
No comments:
Post a Comment