After Trump ‘terminates' trade talks, Canada scraps proposed levy: What was the Digital Services Tax, how it would hit US firms
Trump had called the tax 'a direct and blatant attack on our Country'. It was supposed to come into effect on Monday, June 30. After Canada's walk-back, its finance minister, François-Philippe Champagne, spoke to the US trade representative Jamieson Greer on Sunday, signalling that the trade deal talks might be back on track.
What is Canada's Digital Services Tax, and why was it such a sticking issue with the US? What will its revocation mean for Prime Minister Mark Carney's government? We explain.
The tax aimed to collect a levy of 3% of the revenue a digital services firm made from Canadian users, above $20 million in a calendar year. In one of its more controversial clauses, payments were to be retroactive, beginning 2022. While the law had been passed earlier, payments were due from today.
Among those impacted would have been major Amercian technology firms, such as Google, Meta, Apple, Amazon, etc.
'The DST was announced in 2020 to address the fact that many large technology companies operating in Canada may not otherwise pay tax on revenues generated from Canadians… While Canada was working with international partners, including the United States, on a multilateral agreement that would replace national digital services taxes, the DST was enacted to address the aforementioned taxation gap,' Canada's finance ministry said on June 29.
If the law had been implemented, American companies would have had to pay roughly $2.7 billion to the Canadian government, a report in The New York Times said. Trump was vehemently opposed to the law.
On Friday, he posted on Truth Social, 'We have just been informed that Canada, a very difficult Country to TRADE with… has just announced that they are putting a Digital Services Tax on our American Technology Companies, which is a direct and blatant attack on our Country… Based on this egregious Tax, we are hereby terminating ALL discussions on Trade with Canada, effective immediately. 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.'
Getting a trade deal with the US is important for Canada, which, going by US Census Bureau data, exported $412.7 billion worth of goods to the US last year.
At present, Trump has slapped 50% tariffs on steel and aluminum imports from Canada and 25% on auto imports, apart from the 10% base tariff he has put on most countries. Along with this, Canada and Mexico face tariffs of 25% apparently to curb fentanyl smuggling to the US.
Canada, thus, agreed to scrap the tax to take trade talks forward.
'In our negotiations on a new economic and security relationship between Canada and the United States, Canada's new government will always be guided by the overall contribution of any possible agreement to the best interests of Canadian workers and businesses. Today's announcement will support a resumption of negotiations toward the July 21, 2025, timeline set out at this month's G7 Leaders' Summit in Kananaskis,' PM Carney said on Sunday.
Given that Carney had come to power mainly on a platform of standing up to Trump, this fold-up could have been embarrasing for him. However, the tax wasn't too popular within Canada either, as it could have raised the cost of digital services like hailing rides and streaming movies.
Robin Guy, a leader of the Canadian Chamber of Commerce, had said in July last year, 'The imposition of a retroactive discriminatory digital services tax by the federal government will not only make life more expensive for Canadian families, businesses and workers, but it will significantly harm our relationship with the United States. The government should reverse its unilateral decision that is out of step with our allies, and instead, work with our trading partners on an international solution that would better serve Canadians.'
In fact, recently, many had believed that the tax's best purpose could be to use it as a bargaining chip in talks with the US.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
32 minutes ago
- First Post
Lunch at White House, hunger at home: Asim Munir's NY trip show what's wrong with Pakistan
When the US establishment engages directly with the Pakistan Army chief while bypassing its elected leadership, it proves that the country's democracy is nothing more than a decorative formality read more In a diplomatic spectacle that could only be described as 'deliciously ironic', Field Marshal Asim Munir, Pakistan's Army Chief, was invited to the White House for a tête-à-tête with President Trump. A prime example of irony, this meeting arrived at a time when the very foundations of civilian authority in Pakistan were under siege. A prime minister who can barely finish a term, and a military leader who holds more sway than any elected official. It is a display so spectacular that even the most cynical observer would be tempted to applaud the audacity. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD But this wasn't just a polite exchange of pleasantries; it was a statement. The optics were impeccable, two powerful men sharing a meal while the rest of the world watched, wondering if they were discussing strategy or simply reminiscing about the good old days of military coups. The message was clear: the US wasn't just engaging with Pakistan, it was engaging with the Pakistani military as its de facto representative. A military that doesn't just play a supporting role in Pakistan's governance, but increasingly becomes the lead actor. This was not Pakistan being celebrated in Washington; it was the Pakistani military being reinforced as the permanent sovereign. A state of affairs where civilian leadership is increasingly sidelined in favour of military power. A true diplomatic win? Hardly. More of a political indictment of a system that can't seem to find a way to empower its people through democratic institutions. The Disappearing State: When Civilians Are Optional The absence of Pakistan's Prime Minister and Foreign Minister from this historic meeting wasn't just a diplomatic faux pas; it was a glaring testament to the sidelining of civilian authority. The message was loud and clear: Pakistan's real leader is in uniform, not in a suit. This isn't just about who gets to share the spotlight in Washington. It's about who gets to make the decisions at home. The concept of the 'disappearing state' is rooted in the idea that state visits used to reflect a sovereign hierarchy, where heads of state would meet heads of state. But in Pakistan's case, that chain of command has been brutally ruptured. When the US military or political establishment engages directly with Pakistan's army chief while bypassing its elected leadership, it doesn't just reflect a diplomatic trend; it exacerbates the perception that Pakistan's democracy is nothing more than a decorative formality. The US engagement with General Munir further highlights this, reinforcing the message that military-led governance is acceptable, even preferable, to civilian-led democracy. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD For a country already plagued by a fractured political class, co-opted, humiliated, and frequently sidelined, the result is nothing short of disastrous. Every time a foreign power, particularly the United States, plays along with this narrative, it chips away at the legitimacy of Pakistan's civilian institutions. What's worse, this serves to further marginalise the political class, transforming elected officials into mere figureheads, ornamental but without any real power. This is not just a diplomatic faux pas; it's a death by a thousand photo ops. The Illusion of Strength: Posturing in a Global Theatre While General Munir's invitation to Washington may appear to project strength to domestic audiences in Pakistan, this is a brittle, borrowed form of strength. It's the kind of strength that only appears powerful from a distance. The paradox is unsettling: the more powerful Pakistan's military seems at home, the more dependent it becomes abroad. Far from promoting strategic autonomy, this is strategic theatre, a show designed to distract from the reality of Pakistan's political and economic dependence on foreign powers. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD American engagement with Pakistan's military has historically been less about partnership and more about utility. Whether during the Cold War, the War on Terror, or in the current climate of strategic alliances in the region, the pattern has been unmistakable: when the US needs something, be it military bases, transit routes, or leverage over Afghanistan, it reaches out to Rawalpindi, not Islamabad. This has always been a transactional relationship, not one based on mutual interests or respect. General Munir's visit to Washington follows this exact script. It's a carefully choreographed engagement designed to serve the interests of both parties, but primarily those of the US. What's worse, every such engagement further entraps Pakistan in a cycle of conditional aid, military-to-military cooperation, and silent compliance. As long as Pakistan's military establishment remains the face of the state, it becomes easier for foreign powers to treat Pakistan not as a multifaceted democracy but as a monolithic security apparatus. And in this regard, the US is complicit, not just in supporting Pakistan's military dominance, but in ensuring that civilian power remains an afterthought. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD The Timing of the Lunch and Shared Dessert General Munir's invitation to the White House raised questions about its true intent. While President Trump framed the meeting as a thank-you for preventing a nuclear crisis between India and Pakistan, the timing and context suggested deeper motives. The meeting came at a time of rising tensions with Iran, underscoring Munir's growing influence in Pakistan's power politics. The lunch symbolised a diplomatic gesture that excluded Pakistan's elected leaders, reinforcing the military's dominance in foreign policy. While Munir met with Trump, Pakistan rejected Iran's request for support during its attacks, a move that aligned with Israel's interests. US officials made it clear that no support would come from the broader Islamic world, isolating Iran. Trump's praise of Munir's insight into Iran further highlighted the military's central role, as the civilian government was sidelined. Additionally, Munir's reported attendance at an American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) meeting fuelled concerns over Pakistan's increasing alignment with US and Israeli interests. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD This meeting reflected a return to Cold War-era dynamics between the US and Pakistan. Pakistan reportedly offered rare earth materials and potential crypto council partnerships, benefiting both nations. For Pakistan, it was a way to shift from China to the US, while Trump secured vital resources. However, this deal reinforced the transactional nature of US-Pakistan relations, with the military continuing to dominate foreign policy, sidelining civilian institutions. India Watches, Unbothered! The entire spectacle of General Munir's visit and the subsequent media frenzy in Pakistan might lead some within Pakistan's strategic circles to believe that this is a victory in the ongoing geopolitical rivalry with India. After all, when Pakistan's army chief is feted by the world's most powerful nation, surely it must be a step toward restoring the balance of power, right? Wrong. The truth is far less flattering. From India's perspective, the situation is a source of reassurance rather than concern. India's strategic calculus regarding Pakistan has always been shaped by one key observation: Pakistan's military dominance is its Achilles' Heel. Pakistan's inability to fully embrace civilian rule and forge a truly democratic identity has been a point of pride for India's strategic thinkers for decades. General Munir's trip to Washington only confirms what India has long suspected, that Pakistan is still a security state masquerading as a democracy. And as long as the US continues to treat Pakistan as such, India's concerns about its geopolitical standing are minimal. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD This isn't just about who gets invited to Washington; it's about the deeper dynamics of regional power. While the US-Pakistan military relationship may serve specific American interests, it doesn't fundamentally alter the trajectory of the Pakistan-India rivalry. Instead, it highlights the deepening chasm between Pakistan's civilian institutions and its military-dominated reality. As far as India is concerned, Pakistan's internal dysfunction is less a threat and more a confirmation of its own stability and growing influence in the region. What's Lost in the Optics? The optics of General Munir's luncheon in Washington are not what they seem. While the Pakistani military may read this as an endorsement, a validation of its central role in the state, the deeper reality is far more cynical. The US is not empowering Pakistan's military to make it stronger; it's engaging with it to keep it compliant. The handshake at the White House is not about strengthening Pakistan's sovereignty; it's about ensuring Pakistan doesn't stray too far from the US's strategic orbit. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD By endorsing the military as the primary interlocutor, Washington effectively sidesteps the messy, unpredictable nature of democratic governance. Elections, public dissent, and popular opinion all complicate diplomatic engagement. But by dealing exclusively with the military, the US gets the kind of stability it craves, centralised power that can be easily influenced. The military becomes the puppet, and the US pulls the strings. This dynamic is particularly dangerous because it consolidates Pakistan's place in a cycle of military dominance, foreign dependency, and institutional decay. Pakistan's sovereignty is sacrificed on the altar of strategic convenience, and the long-term health of its democratic institutions is jeopardised in the process. What does this mean for Pakistan's Future? Every state must choose the architecture of its legitimacy, and in Pakistan, that choice has been made again and again: uniforms over ballots. But this form of legitimacy is inherently unstable. Legitimacy built on coercion and foreign validation is always temporary. It erodes slowly, until it collapses suddenly. General Munir's lunch at the White House may satisfy egos and silence critics for a few news cycles, but its strategic cost is enormous. It does nothing to address the underlying tensions between Pakistan's military and its civilian institutions. Instead, it institutionalises the military's role as the face of the nation, an institution that is increasingly less accountable to the people it purports to represent. This is not just a short-term setback for Pakistan's democratic prospects. It is a long-term erosion of the democratic norms that Pakistan once aspired to. And unless something changes, the future of Pakistan looks increasingly like a military-led state, where the voices of its people are drowned out by the noise of military parades and diplomatic dinners. Conclusion: A Meal Served Cold General Munir's luncheon at the White House was more than just a diplomatic event. It was a symbol of Pakistan's ongoing struggle between military dominance and democratic governance. While the world watched, the real question remained: who truly holds the reins of power in Pakistan? The military, cloaked in ceremonial grandeur, seems to be making a play for the throne, one handshake at a time. Until that question is answered, the nation risks remaining a republic in name only. A republic that, like the lunch served at the White House, has grown cold, stale, and increasingly irrelevant to the needs of the people it was designed to serve. Chitra Saini holds a PhD from the School of International Studies, Jawaharlal Nehru University and currently serves as an Assistant Professor (Guest) at the Delhi College of Arts and Commerce, University of Delhi. Amit Kumar is a Senior Research Fellow at the Birla Institute of Technology and Science, Pilani, Rajasthan, India. The views expressed in the above piece are personal and solely those of the authors. They do not necessarily reflect Firstpost's views.
Time of India
35 minutes ago
- Time of India
Read Mark Zuckerberg's full memo to employees on Meta Superintelligence Labs: We are going to …
Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg has officially announced the formation of Meta Superintelligence Labs . The new division aims to develop 'personal superintelligence for everyone' and will be led by former Scale AI CEO Alexandr Wang as its Chief AI Officer. This move follows Meta's recent $14.3 billion acquisition of Wang's data-labeling startup. Wang will co-lead MSL alongside former GitHub CEO Nat Friedman, who will focus on AI products and applied research. In a memo sent to employees, Zuckerberg also introduced the full team of 11 members who the company has hired from competitors like Google, OpenAI and Anthropic. Read Meta CEO's full memo to his employees: As the pace of AI progress accelerates, developing superintelligence is coming into sight. I believe this will be the beginning of a new era for humanity, and I am fully committed to doing what it takes for Meta to lead the way. Today I want to share some details about how we're organizing our AI efforts to build towards our vision: personal superintelligence for everyone. We're going to call our overall organization Meta Superintelligence Labs (MSL). This includes all of our foundations, product, and FAIR teams, as well as a new lab focused on developing the next generation of our models. Alexandr Wang has joined Meta to serve as our Chief AI Officer and lead MSL. Alex and I have worked together for several years, and I consider him to be the most impressive founder of his generation. He has a clear sense of the historic importance of superintelligence, and as co-founder and CEO he built ScaleAI into a fast-growing company involved in the development of almost all leading models across the industry. Nat Friedman has also joined Meta to partner with Alex to lead MSL, heading our work on AI products and applied research. Nat will work with Connor to define his role going forward. He ran GitHub at Microsoft, and most recently has run one of the leading AI investment firms. Nat has served on our Meta Advisory Group for the last year, so he already has a good sense of our roadmap and what we need to do. We also have several strong new team members joining today or who have joined in the past few weeks that I'm excited to share as well: Trapit Bansal -- pioneered RL on chain of thought and co-creator of o-series models at OpenAI. Shuchao Bi -- co-creator of GPT-4o voice mode and o4-mini. Previously led multimodal post-training at OpenAI. Huiwen Chang -- co-creator of GPT-4o's image generation, and previously invented MaskGIT and Muse text-to-image architectures at Google Research Ji Lin -- helped build o3/o4-mini, GPT-4o, GPT-4 .1, GPT-4.5, 4o-imagegen, and Operator reasoning stack. Joel Pobar -- inference at Anthropic. Previously at Meta for 11 years on HHVM, Hack, Flow, Redex, performance tooling, and machine learning. Jack Rae -- pre-training tech lead for Gemini and reasoning for Gemini 2.5. Led Gopher and Chinchilla early LLM efforts at DeepMind . Hongyu Ren -- co-creator of GPT-4o, 4o-mini, o1-mini, o3-mini, o3 and o4-mini. Previously leading a group for post-training at OpenAI. Johan Schalkwyk -- former Google Fellow, early contributor to Sesame, and technical lead for Maya. Pei Sun -- post-training, coding, and reasoning for Gemini at Google Deepmind. Previously created the last two generations of Waymo's perception models. Jiahui Yu -- co-creator of o3, o4-mini, GPT-4.1 and GPT-4o. Previously led the perception team at OpenAI, and co-led multimodal at Gemini. Shengjia Zhao -- co-creator of ChatGPT, GPT-4, all mini models, 4.1 and o3. Previously led synthetic data at OpenAI. I'm excited about the progress we have planned for Llama 4.1 and 4.2. These models power Meta AI, which is used by more than 1 billion monthly actives across our apps and an increasing number of agents across Meta that help improve our products and technology. We're committed to continuing to build out these models. In parallel, we're going to start research on our next generation of models to get to the frontier in the next year or so. I've spent the past few months meeting top folks across Meta, other AI labs, and promising startups to put together the founding group for this small talent-dense effort. We're still forming this group and we'll ask several people across the AI org to join this lab as well. Meta is uniquely positioned to deliver superintelligence to the world. We have a strong business that supports building out significantly more compute than smaller labs. We have deeper experience building and growing products that reach billions of people. We are pioneering and leading the AI glasses and wearables category that is growing very quickly. And our company structure allows us to move with vastly greater conviction and boldness. I'm optimistic that this new influx of talent and parallel approach to model development will set us up to deliver on the promise of personal superintelligence for everyone. We have even more great people at all levels joining this effort in the coming weeks, so stay tuned. I'm excited to dive in and get to work. AI Masterclass for Students. Upskill Young Ones Today!– Join Now
Time of India
35 minutes ago
- Time of India
Inside Meta's Superintelligence Lab: The scientists Mark Zuckerberg handpicked; the race to build real AGI
Mark Zuckerberg has rarely been accused of thinking small. After attempting to redefine the internet through the metaverse, he's now set his sights on a more ambitious frontier: superintelligence—the idea that machines can one day match, or even surpass, the general intelligence of humans. To that end, Meta has created an elite unit with a name that sounds like it belongs in a sci-fi script: Meta Superintelligence Lab (MSL). But this isn't fiction. It's a real-world, founder-led moonshot, powered by aggressive hiring, audacious capital, and a cast of technologists who've quietly shaped today's AI landscape. This is not just a story of algorithms and GPUs. It's about power, persuasion, and the elite brains Zuckerberg believes will push Meta into the next epoch of intelligence. The architects: Who's running Meta's AGI Ambitions? Zuckerberg has never been one to let bureaucracy slow him down. So he didn't delegate the hiring for MSL—he did it himself. The three minds now driving this initiative are not traditional corporate executives. They are product-obsessed builders, technologists who operate with startup urgency and almost missionary belief in Artificial general intelligence (AGI). Name Role at MSL Past Lives Education Alexandr Wang Chief AI Officer, Head of MSL Founder, Scale AI MIT dropout (Computer Science) Nat Friedman Co-lead, Product & Applied AI CEO, GitHub; Microsoft executive B.S. Computer Science & Math, MIT Daniel Gross (Joining soon, role TBD) Co-founder, Safe Superintelligence; ex-Apple, YC No degree; accepted into Y Combinator at 18 Wang, once dubbed the world's youngest self-made billionaire, is a data infrastructure prodigy who understands what it takes to feed modern AI. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like My baby is in so much pain, please help us? Donate For Health Donate Now Undo Friedman, a revered figure in the open-source community, knows how to productise deep tech. And Gross, who reportedly shares Zuckerberg's intensity, brings a perspective grounded in AI alignment and risk. Together, they form a high-agency, no-nonsense leadership core—Zuckerberg's version of a Manhattan Project trio. The Scientists: 11 defections that shook the AI world If leadership provides the vision, the next 11 are the ones expected to engineer it. In a hiring spree that rattled OpenAI, DeepMind, and Anthropic, Meta recruited some of the world's most sought-after researchers—those who helped build GPT-4, Gemini, and several of the most important multimodal models of the decade. Name Recruited From Expertise Education Jack Rae DeepMind LLMs, long-term memory in AI CMU, UCL Pei Sun DeepMind Structured reasoning (Gemini project) Tsinghua, CMU Trapit Bansal OpenAI Chain-of-thought prompting, model alignment IIT Kanpur, UMass Amherst Shengjia Zhao OpenAI Alignment, co-creator of ChatGPT, GPT-4 Tsinghua, Stanford Ji Lin OpenAI Model optimization, GPT-4 scaling Tsinghua, MIT Shuchao Bi OpenAI Speech-text integration Zhejiang, UC Berkeley Jiahui Yu OpenAI/Google Gemini vision, GPT-4 multimodal USTC, UIUC Hongyu Ren OpenAI Robustness and safety in LLMs Peking Univ., Stanford Huiwen Chang Google Muse, MaskIT – next-gen image generation Tsinghua, Princeton Johan Schalkwyk Sesame AI/Google Voice AI, led Google's voice search efforts Univ. of Pretoria Joel Pobar Anthropic/Meta Infrastructure, PyTorch optimization QUT (Australia) This roster isn't just impressive on paper—it's a coup. Several were responsible for core components of GPT-4's reasoning, efficiency, and voice capabilities. Others led image generation innovations like Muse or built memory modules crucial for scaling up AI's attention spans. Meta's hires reflect a global brain gain: most completed their undergrad education in China or India, and pursued PhDs in the US or UK. It's a clear signal to students—brilliance isn't constrained by geography. What Meta offered: Money, mission, and total autonomy Convincing this calibre of talent to switch sides wasn't easy. Meta offered more than mission—it offered unprecedented compensation. • Some were offered up to $300 million over four years. • Sign-on bonuses of $50–100 million were on the table for top OpenAI researchers. • The first year's payout alone reportedly crossed $100 million for certain hires. This level of compensation places them above most Fortune 500 CEOs—not for running a company, but for building the future. It's also part of a broader message: Zuckerberg is willing to spend aggressively to win this race. OpenAI's Sam Altman called it "distasteful." Others at Anthropic and DeepMind described the talent raid as 'alarming.' Meta, meanwhile, has made no apologies. In the words of one insider: 'This is the team that gets to skip the red tape. They sit near Mark. They move faster than anyone else at Meta.' The AGI problem: Bigger than just scaling up But even with all the talent and capital in the world, AGI remains the toughest problem in computer science. The goal isn't to make better chatbots or faster image generators. It's to build machines that can reason, plan, and learn like humans. Why is that so hard? • Generalisation: Today's models excel at pattern recognition, not abstract reasoning. They still lack true understanding. • Lack of theory: There is no grand unified theory of intelligence. Researchers are working without a blueprint. • Massive compute: AGI may require an order of magnitude more compute than even GPT-4 or Gemini. • Safety and alignment: Powerful models can behave in unexpected, even dangerous ways. Getting them to want what humans want remains an unsolved puzzle. To solve these, Meta isn't just scaling up—it's betting on new architectures, new training methods, and new safety frameworks. It's also why several of its new hires have deep expertise in AI alignment and multimodal reasoning. What this means for students aiming their future in AI This story isn't just about Meta. It's about the direction AI is heading—and what it takes to get to the frontier. If you're a student in India wondering how to break into this world, take notes: • Strong math and computer science foundations matter. Most researchers began with robust undergrad training before diving into AI. • Multimodality, alignment, and efficiency are key emerging areas. Learn to work across language, vision, and reasoning. • Internships, open-source contributions, and research papers still open doors faster than flashy resumes. • And above all, remember: AI is as much about values as it is about logic. The future won't just be built by engineers—it'll be shaped by ethicists, philosophers, and policy thinkers too. Is your child ready for the careers of tomorrow? Enroll now and take advantage of our early bird offer! Spaces are limited.
