
Canadian businesses seek certainty in US tariff war
Deal or no deal, what Wes Love wants is certainty.His Toronto-area business, Taurus Craco, imports machinery from overseas and distributes it across North America, mainly to the United States.But President Donald Trump's shifting tariffs on Canadian products have left him, like many independent business owners, unable to plan for the future."What has been creating indecision in the market is people don't know which way this is going to go," Mr Love told the BBC in June. "And in small businesses, indecision is killer."
Taurus Craco was hit hard by the tariffs earlier this year when it was forced to shell out nearly C$35,000 ($25,500, £18,700) because a shipment to the US crossed the border a few minutes after one deadline."It is totally punitive. From a small business perspective, that's more than the cost that we spend on hydro and gas for the entire year," he said.Even though Trump paused that tariff a few hours later, Taurus Craco still had to pay. Refusing would mean no longer being allowed to transport its products into the US, Mr Love said."It's like dealing with the mob," he said.Canada is in a tit-for-tat tariff war with its largest trading partner, faciing a series of levies, in particular on metals and auto. Since taking office in January, Trump has announced a series of import taxes on goods from other countries - arguing they will boost American manufacturing and protect jobs. The ensuing uncertainty has hit Canada's economy and intense talks between the two countries hit a snag on Friday.
Prime Minister Mark Carney has called Trump's tariffs "unjust", and said while campaigning for the April election that the "old relationship" with the US is "over". Shortly after winning that election, the prime minister visited Washington DC, taking a more conciliatory message to the White House to launch talks on a new trade and security deal. A 16 July deadline since has been set to hash out that deal, and President Trump said at the recent G7 summit that he was optimistic the two countries could "work something out" on trade.But on Friday, Trump said he was cutting trade talks over Canada's digital services tax. "We are hereby terminating ALL discussions on Trade with Canada, effective immediately," he wrote on social media.Carney has threatened to impose another round of retaliatory tariffs on the US if the talks aren't successful. Mr Love welcomes any prospect of a deal."Give us a set of rules and leave them alone and let us operate within those rules," he said."It's like sport, right? Everybody goes onto the field and you play to a set of rules, but you don't change the rules in the middle of the game."
Trade, a sudden exit, Middle East conflict - five takeaways from G7'A stab in the back' - car workers in Canada hit out at US over tariffsThe reality behind Trump's incredible investment claimsWhat tariffs has Trump announced and why?
Gaphel Kongtsa, international policy director at the Canadian Chamber of Commerce, said businesses are hopeful an agreement will bring stability. Thus far, they have had to navigate a very fluid landscape, he said, "where seemingly things get increased or decreased or added on without very much clear indication as to why".Canada is hugely reliant on trade with the US, with 75% of its exports heading south, according to Statistics Canada.Its economy has slowed significantly in the first quarter of 2025 as a result of trade war and the ensuing uncertainty - growing only 0.8% between 1 January and 31 March, according to the Canadian Federation of Independent Business (CFIB).It shrank 0.1% over a month in April. A timeline of the tariffs shows what a whirlwind few months it has been.On 1 February, Trump imposed a 25% tariff on most Canadian imports, then suspended them for a month days later. They were re-imposed when that deadline expired, only to be again delayed. Not long after, he granted an exemption on all goods that were compliant with the current North American free trade deal, known as the USMCA. Then in March, the US imposed a global 25% tariff on imported steel and aluminium as well as on imported vehicles. This month, Trump raised the metals tariff to 50%.
The manufacturing sector has been in the spotlight when it comes to the tariffs, but the service sector also is affected by the uncertainty, if not by the levies directly. Sam Gupta is the founder and CEO at ElevatIQ, a technology and management consultancy that operates out of Buffalo, New York, and in Toronto.Mr Gupta said most people don't think about the service sector during a period of uncertainty, calling it the "unloved stepchild" of the economy."The attention goes to all the manufacturing companies and the companies that are directly impacted by the supply chain," he said. Still, services - which encompass everything from finance to tourism - make up a huge proportion of Canada's economy, accounting for the vast majority of its workforce.Service exporters have not been hit as hard as manufacturing, but their outlook and confidence in the market is at the lowest level in years, according to data from the Canadian Chamber of Commerce.And while Ottawa has implemented several measures to provide relief to companies hit by the tariffs - including from funds raised by counter tariffs - the service sector has not received any compensation."We are not even in the conversation," Mr Gupta said. "We don't exist."He said his business is not financially struggling at the moment, but noted that inquiries for his firm's services were "down by 50%".
"As far as our understanding goes, not a lot of businesses are thinking about these longterm investments right now. It just, they just are not in the mindset," he said."The biggest fear that we all have right now is, I don't know how long this is going to go. If it is going to be six months, a year, 18 months, we can still survive. But let's say this goes on for like two years, three years then oh, my goodness, it will be, really, really hard."This has been the toughest period for the industry in his 20-year career, as the sector faces a combination of challenges, he said. Mr Gupta recalled how easy it was for him to get a well-paying job early in his career. "Even when I was graduating, we were getting paid like crazy. And we were so arrogant that we would not even pick up calls from recruiters," he said."But now with AI, with tariffs, the economy, everything, everybody that I know is struggling," he said. Statistics Canada reports that 56% of all businesses that export to the US have taken measures to mitigate the impact of tariffs.More than 30% have delayed major investments and expenditures, while 25% sought alternative customers outside the US.The Bank of Canada said on Wednesday that exports to the US dropped by more than 15% in April. Steel and aluminium exports were down by 25% and 11%, and the export of vehicles had fallen by 25%.But despite everything, Mr Love remains positive.He said businesses can navigate the challenges as long as the US does not keep changing its trade policy."We're entrepreneurs. We are full of piss and vinegar, as they would say," he said."And so we are doing everything that we possibly can to keep fighting. And I think we will be successful; we just need to know what the ground rules are."
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Reuters
33 minutes ago
- Reuters
Senate Republicans seek to end EV tax credit by September 30
June 28 (Reuters) - U.S. Senate Republicans late Friday released a revised a tax and budget bill that would end the $7,500 tax credit on new electric vehicle sales and leases on Sept. 30 as well as the $4,000 tax credit for used EVs. The prior proposal would have ended the credit for new and used sales 180 days after the bill was signed into law and immediately ended the credit for leased vehicles not assembled in North America and meeting other requirements. Republicans have taken aim at EVs on a number of fronts, a reversal from former President Joe Biden's policy that encouraged electric vehicles and renewable energy to fight climate change and reduce emissions.


The Independent
an hour ago
- The Independent
Trump claims he spared Khamenei's life but would consider bombing Iran again
Donald Trump claimed that he spared the life of Iran 's supreme leader, Ali Khamenei, but would consider bombing Iran again if Tehran enriched uranium to worrisome levels. The US president also reacted sternly to Mr Khamenei's first remarks since Iran's 12-day military conflict with Israel ended. The US had joined the conflict on Israel 's side by launching a bombing raid on Iranian nuclear sites last week, prompting Iran to retaliate with an attack on an American military base in Qatar. Mr Khamenei said Iran had 'slapped America in the face' by attacking the base in Qatar. He also said that Iran would never surrender. Claiming to have spared the supreme leader's life, Mr Trump said: "I SAVED HIM FROM A VERY UGLY AND IGNOMINIOUS DEATH.' American officials told Reuters on 15 June that Mr Trump had vetoed an Israeli plan to kill Mr Khamenei. "His Country was decimated, his three evil Nuclear Sites were OBLITERATED and I knew EXACTLY where he was sheltered, and would not let Israel, or the US Armed Forces, by far the Greatest and Most Powerful in the World, terminate his life," Mr Trump said in a social media post. Iran said any potential nuclear deal was conditional on the US ending its "disrespectful tone" towards the supreme leader. "If President Trump is genuine about wanting a deal, he should put aside the disrespectful and unacceptable tone towards Iran's Supreme Leader, Grand Ayatollah Khamenei, and stop hurting his millions of heartfelt followers," the foreign minister, Abbas Araqchi, said in an X post in the early hours of Saturday. Mr Trump also said that in recent days he had been working on the possible removal of sanctions on Iran to give it a chance for a speedy recovery, but had now abandoned that effort. "I get hit with a statement of anger, hatred, and disgust, and immediately dropped all work on sanction relief, and more," he said. Mr Trump said at a White House news conference he did not rule out attacking Iran again when asked about the possibility of new bombing of Iranian nuclear sites if deemed necessary at some point. "Sure, without question, absolutely," he said. Mr Trump said he would like inspectors from the International Atomic Energy Agency, the UN nuclear watchdog, or another respected source to be able to inspect Iran's nuclear sites after they were bombed last weekend. The US president rejected any suggestion that damage to the nuclear sites was not as profound as he had claimed. IAEA chief Rafael Grossi said on Wednesday that ensuring the resumption of IAEA inspections was his top priority as none had taken place since Israel began bombing on 13 June. Iran has moved to suspend such inspections, however. Mr Araqchi indicated on Friday Tehran would likely reject Mr Grossi's request for visits to Iranian nuclear sites. Mr Trump said Iran still wanted to meet about the way forward. The White House had said on Thursday no meeting between the US and an Iranian delegation had been scheduled thus far.


Spectator
an hour ago
- Spectator
The dark side of LinkedIn
I'd always assumed that LinkedIn is Instagram for people with lanyards. A place for earnest self-congratulation, polite emoji applause, and lightly airbrushed career updates: 'Humbled to be speaking at Davos'; 'Thrilled to have joined Deloitte'; 'Grateful to my incredible team for smashing Q4 targets.' That sort of thing. Sanitised, self-serving and safely anodyne with an easy trade: a like for a like, a 'repost' for a 'funny'. Instead of an apology, I received a torrent of replies ranging from 'you had it coming' to 'stop making a fuss' So when I posted something mildly provocative, I expected at worst a few furrowed brows and an awkward silence in the comments. I did not expect a social media thunderstorm. The provocation? A practical, depoliticised Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI) plan. In light of US president Donald Trump's executive orders and the ensuing legal backlash, DEI has become the HR profession's third rail. Everyone has an opinion; no one wants to get electrocuted. So I thought I'd share a seven-point plan my company had helped a FTSE 30 board adopt: it's a model that replaces ideology with evidence and helps everyone, not just identity groups, to thrive. The plan advised against the lexicon of victimhood: no mention of 'oppressed vs oppressors', 'white privilege', or 'institutional phobias.' Instead, it proposed focusing on universal human truths: that everyone faces different headwinds and tailwinds, many of them invisible, and not all equal; that rather than victims and perpetrators we all have a role in creating a work environment where people succeed based on their talents, rather than their background. We advocated everyday language. 'Bias' was out. 'Good judgment' was in. We called for a duty of care to all, rather than declarations on global political events. It was not radical. In fact, it was built on rigorous behavioural science and tested in various large companies. I thought it might even be useful. But then I had forgotten where I was. This was LinkedIn, supposedly the realm of calm, considerate professionalism. In reality, it is anything but. The backlash came fast. First, a client rang up one of my colleagues to say that unless I publicly retracted my comments, he'd cease working with us. This proved to be prophetic but not, I suspect, for the reasons he'd imagined. Two weeks later, the client was 'let go'. It appears that his world of work had had enough of his woke. A DEI influencer – high on followers, low on nuance – quoted my line about 'headwinds' and added, 'Amazing mental gymnastics for someone who, according to multiple online biographers, is the 'son of socialite Brinsley Black.' I can't even…' Here was a man who claims to champion fairness and inclusion attacking me for something my father may or may not have done fifty years ago. Expecting a few voices from HR's vast choir of speak-up culture to chime in, I posted a polite but firm response: 'You have picked up on something from the web (not well known for its accuracy) and decided to play the person rather than the ball. If I had plucked some slight about your parents from the internet and used it to dismiss your arguments, I suspect you'd be outraged and rightly so. I think you – and the 39 people who liked your comment – owe me an apology.' Instead of an apology, I received a torrent of replies ranging from 'you had it coming' to 'stop making a fuss'. A few kind souls sent DMs in solidarity (thank you), but the public square remained conspicuously quiet. It was as if everyone had decided that speaking out was something they were keen to encourage other people to do, but, when it came to taking on a DEI aficionado, it wasn't worth the risk. Then came my next misstep. I congratulated Barclays for ensuring there were women-only as well as mixed-gender loos after the Supreme Court clarified the legal definition of sex. Cue the mob. The pile-on made the previous furore feel like a warm-up act. This time, I panicked and did something I regret to this day: I deleted the post. But the strangest thing wasn't the rage. It was what happened next. My posts – which previously tended to reach a respectable 10,000 impressions – now struggled to break 500. Posts containing valuable new evidence on productivity, absenteeism and the psychology of high performance languished in obscurity. I had, it seemed, been ghosted by the machine. LinkedIn, for all its talk of inclusion, appears to have the subtle hand of censorship down to an algorithmic art. You're not suspended; just muffled. Not punished; just buried. There's no trial. No court of appeal. No feedback. Just the quiet hum of the system deciding you're no longer quite right for the party. This is a platform that claims: 'We are open, honest and constructive. By seeking the truth and keeping it real, we are more likely to generate solutions to difficult problems.' It's a lovely sentiment. Someone should tell their bots.