Furious Trump walks away from Canada trade talks
Donald Trump has walked away from trade talks with Canada in response to a digital services tax he described as a 'blatant attack on our country'.
The president said he had immediately ended discussions taking place to address the series of tariffs he placed on the country earlier this year.
In a post on Truth Social, Mr Trump said his administration had been informed that Canada was planning to proceed with a three per cent tax on technology companies such as Meta, Uber, Amazon and Google, on revenue earned from Canadian customers.
Because the tax is retroactive, the American companies could face a bill of as much as $2bn by the end of the month.
On Thursday, Scott Bessent, the Treasury Secretary, said the Group of Seven nations would put a pause on the taxes for US tech companies. In exchange, he said Republicans in Congress were planning to halt a so-called revenge tax on foreign investors.
'Based on this egregious tax, we are hereby terminating ALL discussions on trade with Canada, effective immediately,' Mr Trump wrote. 'We will let Canada know the tariff that they will be paying to do business with the United States of America within the next seven day period.'
Canada is the US's second biggest trading partner after Mexico, and bought around $350bn (£255) worth of American goods last year, according to official data. In exchange, it exported $412bn (£300) of goods.
Canadians were stunned when Mr Trump announced major tariffs on its northern neighbour, as well as Mexico. Canada hit back at the 25 per cent levy on steel and aluminium, with a similar tariff on a range of US items.
Mark Carney has said the trading relationship between the two countries had been changed forever.
Anger over the tariffs was one of the reasons Mr Carney's beleaguered Liberal Party was re-elected, despite being poised to lose to the Conservative Party in a general election in May.
Mr Carney who previously led both the Bank of England and the Bank of Canada, took a hard line against the US president as he continued to make '51st state' jibes.
There was no immediate response from Mr Carney's office on Friday's development.
It comes as Mr Trump's government is set to reimpose a number of high tariffs that he announced in April on almost all of America's trading partners.
Of those nations, only two countries, Britain and China, have agreements with the US to even a framework of a trade deal.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Reuters
9 minutes ago
- Reuters
Warren Buffett donates record $6 billion Berkshire shares
June 27 (Reuters) - Warren Buffett donated on Friday another $6 billion of Berkshire Hathaway (BRKa.N), opens new tab stock to the Gates Foundation and four family charities, his biggest annual donation since he began giving away his fortune nearly two decades ago. The donation of about 12.36 million Berkshire Class B shares boosted Buffett's overall giving to the charities to well over $60 billion. He donated 9.43 million shares to the Gates Foundation; 943,384 shares to the Susan Thompson Buffett Foundation; and 660,366 shares to each of three charities led respectively by his children Howard, Susie, and Peter: the Howard G. Buffett Foundation, Sherwood Foundation and NoVo Foundation. Warren Buffett still owns 13.8% of Berkshire's stock, based on reported shares outstanding. His $152 billion net worth prior to Friday's donations made him the world's fifth-richest person, according to Forbes magazine. Buffett would rank sixth after the donations, which surpassed the $5.3 billion he donated last June. He donated another $1.14 billion to the family charities last November. In a statement, Buffett maintained he does not intend to sell any Berkshire shares. Now 94, Buffett began giving away his fortune in 2006. He changed his will last year, designating 99.5% of his remaining fortune after his death to a charitable trust overseen by his children. They will have about a decade to distribute, opens new tab the money, and must decide where it goes unanimously. Susie Buffett is 71, Howard Buffett is 70, and Peter Buffett is 67. Warren Buffett has led Omaha, Nebraska-based Berkshire since 1965. The $1.05 trillion conglomerate owns close to 200 businesses including Geico car insurance and the BNSF railroad, and dozens of stocks including Apple (AAPL.O), opens new tab and American Express (AXP.N), opens new tab. Susie Buffett leads the Susan Thompson Buffett Foundation, which funds reproductive health and is named for her mother, who was Warren Buffett's first wife. The Sherwood Foundation supports Nebraska nonprofits and early childhood education. The Howard G. Buffett Foundation focuses on global hunger, combating human trafficking and mitigating conflicts. The NoVo Foundation has initiatives focused on marginalized girls and women, and on indigenous communities. Buffett said last June that donations to the Gates Foundation would end when he dies.
The Independent
10 minutes ago
- The Independent
New Hampshire lawsuit seeks to stop politicization of youth center abuse victims' fund
Lawyers representing hundreds of men and woman who claim they were abused at New Hampshire's youth detention center filed a class action lawsuit Friday seeking to prevent the independent administrator of the state's settlement fund for victims from being replaced with a political appointee. Lawmakers created the settlement fund in 2022, pitching it as a 'victim-centered' and 'trauma-informed' alternative to litigation that would be run by a neutral administrator appointed by the state Supreme Court. But the Republican-led Legislature changed that process through last-minute additions to the state budget approved Thursday and signed into law by Gov. Kelly Ayotte on Friday. Under the new provisions taking effect July 1, the governor will have the authority to hire and fire the fund's administrator, and the attorney general — also a political appointee — would have veto power over settlement awards. In affidavits filed with their complaint, the lead plaintiffs said the change amounts to a bait and switch that reignited the skepticism they initially felt about the settlement process but tried to put aside. 'I never would have shared the full story of what happened to me if I did not think I would be heard by someone impartial,' said a woman identified only as Jane Doe, who said she ran away from home to escape sexual abuse only to be further abused in state custody. 'I feel incredibly betrayed by the state's actions, but this is just the latest in a long list of betrayals by the state, so maybe I should not be surprised,' she said. 'This also makes me wonder whether the state will next betray the promise of confidentiality, because it seems like their word does not mean anything to them.' Another plaintiff, Andrew Foley, described being diagnosed with PTSD, not from his time as a combat soldier in Iraq but from the physical and sexual abuse he suffered as a child. 'As I understand it, the State will now decide for itself how much my claim is worth. That is the opposite of a fair process,' his affidavit said. 'As I always believed, the state cannot be trusted.' Neither Ayotte nor Attorney General John Formella responded to requests for comment Friday. More than 1,300 people have sued since 2020 alleging that they were physically or sexually abused in state custody as children, most of them at the Sununu Youth Services Center in Manchester. Only one case has gone to trial, resulting in a $38 million verdict, though the state is trying to slash it to $475,000. Two other cases have been settled for $10 million and $4.5 million. The state also has brought criminal charges against former workers, with two convictions and two mistrials so far. Many of the alleged victims put their lawsuits on hold and applied to the settlement fund, which caps payouts at $2.5 million. As of March 31, 296 cases had been settled, with an average award of $543,000, according to the most recently available statistics. The lawsuit filed Friday seeks a temporary restraining order to prevent the governor from firing the current administrator, former state Supreme Court Chief Justice John Broderick.
The Independent
10 minutes ago
- The Independent
California energy regulator recommends pause on plan to penalize excess oil profits
California should pause Gov. Gavin Newsom 's plan to penalize oil companies if their profits climb too high, a top energy regulator said Friday while unveiling proposals aimed at addressing high gas prices. The Democratic governor signed a law in 2023 giving the California Energy Commission the authority to penalize oil companies for excess profits, declaring the state had 'finally beat big oil.' More than two years later, the commission hasn't imposed a single penalty or determined what counts as an excessive profit. Now, Siva Gunda, the energy commission's vice-chair, says the state should pause the effort in favor of pursuing other policies to lower prices and maintain a steady oil supply — all while pushing to phase out reliance on fossil fuels over the next two decades. 'Together, we will evolve California's strategy to successfully phase out petroleum-based fuels by 2045 while protecting communities, workers, and consumers, and foster market conditions that support the industry's ability to operate safely, reliably, and successfully to meet demand through the transition,' Gunda wrote in a letter to Newsom. Gunda's recommended pause of the penalty would have to be agreed upon by the full commission. Newsom has pitched the penalty as a way to rein in profits by oil companies, but critics said it would only raise prices. California has the highest gas prices in the nation, largely due to taxes and environmental regulations. Regular unleaded gas prices were $4.61 a gallon Friday, compared to a national average of $3.20, according to AAA. The commission still plans to set rules that would require oil refineries to keep a minimum level of fuel on hand to avoid shortages when refineries go offline for maintenance, Gunda said. That proposal came out of a law Newsom signed last year after convening a special session aimed at preventing gas price spikes. Gunda's recommendations come months after Newsom in April directed energy regulators to work with refiners on plans to ensure the state maintains a reliable fuel supply as it transitions away from fossil fuels. Newsom spokesperson Daniel Villaseñor said in an email that the governor would review the recommendations and 'advance solutions that maintain a safe, affordable, and reliable supply of transportation fuels for California.' Two major oil companies announced plans over the past year to shut down refineries in the state, further driving uncertainty about how the state should maintain a stable fuel supply as California transitions toward renewable energy. Phillips 66 announced plans to shut down its Los Angeles-area refinery, and Valero said it would cease operations at its Benicia refinery. The two refineries combined account for more than 17% of the state's refining capacity, according to the energy commission. A group of about 50 environmental and consumer groups penned a letter to Newsom and legislative leaders Friday criticizing the proposal to pause implementing a penalty on oil company profits. 'California oil refiners do not need a bailout,' they wrote, adding that the state should 'finish the job' it started to prevent prices at the pump from spiking. ___
