logo
What if killing Canada's digital services tax is just the beginning for Donald Trump?

What if killing Canada's digital services tax is just the beginning for Donald Trump?

Toronto Star11 hours ago
Prime Minister Mark Carney, left, listens to U.S. President Donald Trump while posing for a photograph during the G7 Summit in Kananaskis, Alta. on June 16, 2025. DARRYL DYCK THE CANADIAN PRESS
Flash forward to last week. There was Trump, posting on social media that Canada's incoming Digital Services Tax — a policy that would force American tech giants and other firms, including Canadian ones, to pay up — was nothing short of a 'blatant attack' on the United States. Trump declared he had cut off all negotiations to resolve the trade war that started earlier this year with his wave of tariffs on Canadian goods. In other words, Canada's most important commercial and military partner, the destination for 76 per cent of all exports last year, was willing to ditch talks and dictate terms that could jeopardize thousands of jobs and hundreds of billions of dollars in economic activity. All over a domestic policy the Americans didn't like.
Barely 48 hours later, shortly before midnight on a Sunday, the government announced the tax was dead. Not only would Canada not implement the policy as planned, it would repeal the 2024 law that created it.
Is this Trump using economic pressure to force Canada's hand?
'It is exactly that,' said Lawrence Herman, a veteran trade lawyer and special counsel with the firm, Cassidy Levy Kent.
'It's an example of, on a particular issue, how much pressure can be brought to bear to force Canada to abandon not only a policy, but a law that has been in force for 18 months.'
In Herman's view, the decision looks like a 'significant retreat' by the government, which shows 'how dependent we are on a reasonable relationship' with Canada's largest trading partner. Other policies that Trump has complained about, such as the supply management system for dairy and poultry, could be next, he said. Pete Hoekstra, the U.S. ambassador to Canada, told the CBC this week that he has a 'strong belief' Canada could water down that system by changing a law designed to protect it if that becomes part of a new trade deal.
'It's not a particularly good start to this so-called new economic and security relationship,' Herman said.
He was referring to Carney's stated goal of talks that are now continuing under an agreement struck at the Group of 7 summit in the Alberta Rockies last month to strive for a deal to redefine the relationship by July 21. Others have been harsher in their judgment. Lloyd Axworthy, a former Liberal foreign affairs minister, posted online that Carney was acquiescing to Trump in a way that contradicts his 'elbows up' mantra on the campaign trail.
'Forget any dreams of a more sovereign, self-directed Canada. We're doubling down on the corporate cosiness and U.S. dependency that's defined our last half-century,' he wrote on Substack.
Axworthy did not respond to an interview request Thursday.
For Jean Charest, a former Quebec premier who sits on the government's Canada-U.S. advisory council, the situation illustrates the 'chaos' of dealing with Trump, whose administration is grappling with trade talks and tariffs threats against most countries on the planet. This meant that Carney's government was operating 'in a world of very bad choices,' Charest said. Deciding to scrap the Digital Services Tax, in that context, was 'certainly a legitimate choice,' he said.
'We are not in an ordinary world of negotiations,' Charest added. 'It would be nice to think, 'You give, I give ... we compromise.' It doesn't work that way with Donald Trump, and we're making our way through this by trying to protect essentially what's the most important for us in the short term, and that's a negotiation that has some legs.'
Charest noted that there was opposition inside Canada to the Digital Services Tax, which would have applied back to 2022 with a three per cent tax on Canadian revenues from digital services companies with more than $1.1 billion in global earnings and $20 million inside Canada. The U.S. also pushed back against the policy when Joe Biden was in power.
David Pierce, vice-president of government relations with the Canadian Chamber of Commerce, said his business lobby group felt the Digital Services Tax should be paused. He also said it would have been wrong to proceed with it after the U.S. dropped a controversial provision from Trump's major budget bill last week: the so-called 'revenge tax' that would have hit the U.S. assets of foreign businesses and individuals.
That decision came as the G7 agreed to exempt American firms from a co-ordinated effort to ensure corporations pay a minimum tax, which was 'absolutely a win' for the U.S.
Even so, Pierce said Canada likely had no choice but to drop the policy, given Trump's exploitation of Canada's 'weakness' — its major economic reliance on trade with the U.S.
'We just hope that this now paves the way for a good renewed deal,' said Pierce.
The ultimate goal of the federal government in that deal, at least publicly, has been to return to the terms of the Canada-United States-Mexico Agreement (CUSMA), which Trump signed in 2018 during his first term, after disparaging North American free trade as unfair to his country. That would mean lifting the rounds of tariffs Trump has imposed since the winter, with import duties tied to concerns about drugs and migration over the border, and others that Trump slapped on Canadian autos, steel and aluminum in a bid to promote those sectors in the U.S.
Canada has responded with countertariffs on its own that the government says hit more than $80 billion worth of American imports to Canada.
Canada's lead trade negotiator with the Trump administration, Ambassador Kirsten Hillman, was not available for an interview this week, the embassy in Washington told the Star.
Charest, however, said he believes it is possible that Canada could accept some level of tariffs in a July 21 deal, so long as they have no material effect. Such 'zero-effect' tariffs could only kick in at levels of trade that Canada doesn't or likely won't achieve, for example.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Euro Auctions Group acquires Headingley auto auction firm
Euro Auctions Group acquires Headingley auto auction firm

Winnipeg Free Press

timean hour ago

  • Winnipeg Free Press

Euro Auctions Group acquires Headingley auto auction firm

A decades-old Manitoba car auction has been sold to a European firm. Euro Auctions Group has acquired Associated Auto Auction Ltd., based in Headingley, and its specialist collector car auction brand (Coast2Coast). Neither party would disclose the deal's cost. Associated Auto Auction's staff — roughly 10 people — will stay on board and leadership will remain in place. In time, construction equipment will join the Headingley offerings. Euro Auctions Group encompasses Michener Allen Auctioneering Ltd., which sells industrial equipment in Canada; Michener will relocate to Headingley. Associated Auto Auction is the latest in a string of Canadian auction sites to join the European corporation. North Toronto Auction was bought in May; Jardine Auctioneers in New Brunswick joined in March. Michener Allen Auctioneering was onboarded in October 2023. '(There's) a great deal of opportunity in North America,' said Barry Walker, Euro Auctions communications lead. Equipment auctioning is an international business, he underscored. Euro Auctions Group contacted Associated Auto Auctions about a potential merger. Efficient shipping is among the benefits to joining a large group, said Janelle Collingridge, who bought the Headingley locale with her business partners in 2020. Associated Auto Auctions runs four auctions per month. It was launched in 1971. — Free Press staff

Canada, America — compare and contrast
Canada, America — compare and contrast

Winnipeg Free Press

timean hour ago

  • Winnipeg Free Press

Canada, America — compare and contrast

Opinion Three days and 90 years. That's the difference in age between Canada and America. But the differences between Canadians and Americans have never been on starker display than this, our joint birthday week. It is truly a tale of two countries, a revolutionary society versus an evolutionary community. The United States today is undergoing a second American revolution, one that will determine whether it remains a republican democracy or becomes a presidential autocracy. The signs are ominous. Canada, meanwhile, is engaged in a debate about economic progress and regional and civil accommodation. The signs are hopeful. The Canadian Press files The Peace Tower is pictured on Parliament Hill in Ottawa. The Peace, Order and Good Government clause has shaped the character of Canada, David McLaughlin writes. Two bills tell the tale. Parliament passed Bill C-5 last month, the 'Build Canada Act' meant to eliminate internal trade barriers and accelerate infrastructure projects, with strong majority support from the governing and opposition parties. This past week, Congress passed the 'One Big Beautiful Act,' the largest wealth transfer from the poor to the wealthy in American history, on strict partisan lines. More than differences of policy are on display. Differences of values, culture, and the very role of government are coming to the fore. The U.S. today is asserting 'nationalist sovereignty,' projecting an America-first mindset to protect a perceived superior and threatened cultural way of life. Canada is asserting 'sovereign nationalism,' projecting a distinct and stronger political and cultural identity buttressed by greater domestic economic wherewithal. Consider less than half-a-year of America under Trump. Executive power has exploded at the expense of due legal process to deport migrants and immigrants, using the National Guard and masked, unidentifiable ICE agents to swoop and detain. Law firms have been forced to do free legal work for MAGA-type causes to protect their regular government work, a form of racketeering. Media companies have paid the president or his surrogates tens of millions of dollars to avoid government-sponsored lawsuits against them, threatening freedom of the press. Science and evidence have been shut down in favour of extremist, crank views on vaccines and climate change. Between 12 million and 15 million Americans are about to lose their health insurance, making people sicker and poorer. None of this is being mirrored in Canada, leftist Liberal and rightist Conservative complaints notwithstanding. Even when there is some alignment in policy goals — investing in national defence, more secure borders, less immigration — there is a legitimate Canadian difference. A difference not just in degree but in form. Not just what we choose to do but how we choose to do it. Peace, order, and good government. This sums up the Canadian difference. It sets out our governing culture in constitutional clothing. When Canada was formed in 1867, Parliament was given authority 'to make Laws for the Peace, Order, and good Government of Canada.' This 'POGG clause' was the constitutional device in vogue in the 19th century as the British Empire 'decolonized' itself. Across Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Ireland, and South Africa, each of these countries incorporated the phrase into their self-governing constitutions. Uniquely here, though, this means of figuring out who does what jurisdictionally between the national and subnational governments, grew into a governance ethos for Canada. Our constitutional history has not been without contention over this phrase. Federal governments have justified controversial pan-Canadian interventionism with it such as carbon pricing. But these fights have occurred in the courts of law and public opinion with acceptably civil discourse. Blatant disobedience rarely rears itself. This is due to a political culture in Canada that has been historically shaped and influenced by expectations of, and satisfaction with, peace, order, and good government in our political life. Not the legality of the clause but its sentiment. Even as we've experienced a decades-long decline in deference for traditional public, religious, and social institutions, Canadians have opted for an evolutionary reordering of society in response. No national guard deployed here. Even the most revolutionary development in Canada since Confederation itself, the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, Weekday Evenings Today's must-read stories and a roundup of the day's headlines, delivered every evening. This is to be celebrated. For it is during the difficult, fraught periods of political and societal tension that constitutional norms and behaviour become most important. In short, it is how you get through to the other side. Especially now as we contemplate how to forge a successful transition of 'sovereign nationalism' from today's unipolar economic vulnerability tied to the U.S. market to tomorrow's multi-polar economic wealth model of multiple markets, a transition that will challenge entrenched political and economic orthodoxies across the country through wrenching, uncomfortable change. Imagine if Trump's 'national sovereigntists' had access to this type of constitutional clause to assert unbridled executive power for their federal government. For what is occurring in America today is the greatest assertion of presidential authority at the expense of congress and the judiciary in that republic's history. This has been a year of resurgent Canadian patriotism. Waving the maple leaf flags, singing the national anthem, and posting 'elbows up' are all on the rise. In this, our birthday week, we should celebrate the true unsung hero of our Constitution — the Peace, Order, and Good Government clause. Over a century and a half, it has shaped the character of governing and the distinctiveness of Canada. It has made us — and keeps us — Canadian. David McLaughlin is a former clerk of the executive council and cabinet secretary in the Manitoba government.

Digital agriculture languishing in Canadian fields
Digital agriculture languishing in Canadian fields

Winnipeg Free Press

timean hour ago

  • Winnipeg Free Press

Digital agriculture languishing in Canadian fields

Opinion Frustration oozes out of the opening lines of a report highlighting the current state of adoption for digital agriculture in Canada. 'Digital agriculture offers powerful tools to address Canada's pressing agricultural challenges, but the current approach isn't delivering results,' says the analysis compiled by Manitoba-based EMILI and the Canadian Agri-Food Policy Institute. 'Despite the potential to increase yields by 20 per cent, while reducing environmental impact, Canada captures just three per cent of global agtech venture capital investment compared to 55 per cent in the United States.' SUPPLIED A drone-mapping tech demonstration takes place at Innovation Farms, the Manitoba field space EMILI uses for testing new ag technology. If the trend continues, the report forecasts fewer Canadian agtech companies and fewer innovations to support Canadian farmers, which places the sector at a competitive disadvantage relative to more 'digitally advanced nations.' EMILI (Enterprise Machine Intelligence Learning Initiative), an industry-led body that works with farmers, industry, investors and innovators to promote the development of digital tools for agriculture. So from its perspective, any pace of adoption is too slow. But if you overlay the issues holding it back and the future challenges Canadian agriculture faces in productivity, competitiveness, profitability, generational transfer, labour and sustainability — to name a few — it's hard to argue with the report's conclusion. In short, while farmers have widely embraced technology such as GPS guidance systems, which have shown to reduce fuel costs by as much as 15 per cent and increased yields by upwards of 10 per cent, they have been slow to fully embrace this expanding suite of technologies. It's not because they are stodgy old stick-in-the-muds like they are sometimes portrayed, but because the results so far can't consistently align with the promises. That hesitancy in turn puts a chill on investment as startups working in the innovation space struggle to scale up to commercial release and enter a marketplace where uptake is anything but certain. Just as with the adoption of no-till farming two generations ago, farmers moving into this space aren't just buying different field equipment, they must change how they think about farming to achieve the benefits. It's how they apply what is described as the 'broad ecosystem' of software, robotics and AI-driven insights to their on-farm management that unlocks the potential. 'These tools don't just boost yields. They save time, reduce stress and strengthen farmers' control over their operations. Recognizing this full scope is key to unlocking its full potential across all farm types,' the report says. However, on the farm, potential doesn't pay the bills. If it doesn't rain or it's too cold, hot or wet, the return on investment on a new technology evaporates, even if it works as promised, which isn't always the case. Plus, there are significant barriers to adoption, not the least of which is poor connectivity. More than one-fifth of rural Canadians still lack access to high-speed internet and 90 per cent of Canada's farmers live in underserved areas. Data ownership and control are another problem. Farmers are repeatedly assured they retain ownership of their data, but control over how it is used is a grey area underscored by lengthy consent forms that seemingly require a legal degree to decipher. Farmers are careful about how much intel about their operations they share, as it can affect relationships with suppliers, buyers and competitors. Information is power. Wednesdays A weekly dispatch from the head of the Free Press newsroom. Another issue is interoperability; the different technologies and platforms in the marketplace today don't always talk to each other — making it hard for farmers to harvest the benefits of an integrated system. On top of all that, the policy approach within Canada has been fragmented and short-sighted. 'Canada's mix of federal and provincial programs is not sufficient to drive a digital revolution in Canadian agriculture,' the report says. It calls for digital agriculture to become the focus of Canada's next five-year plan for agriculture when it is negotiated by federal, provincial and territorial ministers. That plan must include an enabling regulatory environment, investment in programs and partnerships, as well as extension support for farmers. Or Canada will fall even further behind. Laura Rance is executive editor, production content lead for Glacier FarmMedia. She can be reached at lrance@ Laura RanceColumnist Laura Rance is editorial director at Farm Business Communications. Read full biography Our newsroom depends on a growing audience of readers to power our journalism. If you are not a paid reader, please consider becoming a subscriber. Our newsroom depends on its audience of readers to power our journalism. Thank you for your support.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store