President-elect Donald Trump has justified his threat of 25% tariffs on Canada by pointing to the US trade deficit. Top Canadian economists have a response to that: it’s all because your country wants cheap oil. The US is on track to end 2024 with the largest overall trade deficit in its history. Its imbalance with Canada is about $60 billion. …Trump has repeatedly claimed the deficit is a subsidy to the Canadian economy, and said Tuesday the US doesn’t need anything from Canada. Import and export data, however, paint a different picture. Among the US’s top partners, its trade with Canada is the most equally balanced — because Canada buys $85 million from the US for every $100 million it exports. When stripping out oil and gas, the US actually has a significant trade surplus with Canada — its biggest energy supplier and a key buyer of American products from food to machinery.
“The Americans have had the better side of the deal because for more than a decade, they’ve been running surpluses on the non-energy side,” Stéfane Marion at National Bank of Canada, said. “Your deficit is with Canada on energy, but Canada allows you to have access to energy at a discount that you refine or transform to sell at a higher price to the rest of the world.” The US has been a net total energy exporter since 2019 as increases in domestic production lowered the need for imports. Still, it imports crude oil, petroleum products, natural gas and electricity from Canada. …“For the first time, the US is actually a net beneficiary when energy prices increase because they’re a net exporter,” Marion said. “Americans need to know the reason you have that is partly because of Canada.”
Donald Trump is threatening to use “economic force” to make Canada the 51st American state. While his comments may be reckless, they are in part due to Canada’s over-reliance on the US market in terms of trade. The benefits of international trade are undoubtedly positive. It’s well-established that when countries can produce a product or service more cheaply than others, giving them what’s known as a “comparative advantage,” all other nations engaged will gain from that trade. …But the key challenge Canadian policymakers face is an over-reliance on the US as Canada’s primary market, with 75% of all Canadian exports headed south. …Canada can no longer take easy access to the U.S. market for granted. …Bringing down barriers to trade across Canadian provinces would create conditions that could enable Canadian companies to be more competitive internationally, and beyond the U.S. market in particular.
The union representing 45,000 dock workers on the U.S. East and Gulf Coasts and their employers on Wednesday said they reached a tentative deal on a new six-year contract, averting further strikes that could have snarled supply chains and taken a toll on the U.S. economy. The International Longshoremen’s Association (ILA) and the United States Maritime Alliance (USMX) employer group, called the agreement a “win-win.” The deal includes a resolution in automation, which had been the thorniest issue of on the table. …”This agreement establishes a framework for implementing technologies that will create more jobs while modernizing East and Gulf coast ports.” Terms of the deal were not disclosed. ILA and USMX have agreed to continue operating until the contract is ratified. …Employers at the ports stretching from Maine to Texas include terminal operators like APM, owned by Maersk, as well as China’s COSCO Shipping and Switzerland’s MSC.
A potential hike in tariffs imposed on Canadian exports to the US as early as January will highlight developments that could define first-quarter trends in the softwood lumber market. …Many traders have expressed a perception that the US economy will prosper in 2025 with a more business friendly administration in the White House. However, if the tariffs are imposed, they could significantly alter the flow of softwood lumber and panels from Canada to the US. Some Canadian producers have already noted that they will withdraw from the US market rather than deal with the rising costs. If returns on shipments to the US plunge, many Canadian mills could funnel a larger percentage of production offshore, especially to Pacific Rim destinations. …Southern Pine traders hope the first quarter sets the stage for a rebound after a difficult year in 2024. Production outpaced demand for most of the year, sustaining steady downward pressure on prices.
If president-elect Donald Trump… follows through with his tariff threat, it could have economic consequences for the U.S. lumber supply chain, according to Rajan Parajuli at NC State. …US. companies would likely attempt to recoup tariff-related losses by raising the price of Canadian softwood lumber, which would potentially impact the housing market by making building materials more expensive. …Parajuli highlighted the 2006 U.S.–Canada Softwood Lumber Agreement as an example of how tariffs can impact the supply chain. …Under the agreement, which was active until 2015, U.S. lumber producers gained $1.6 billion and U.S. consumers lost $2.3 billion as softwood lumber imports from Canada declined by 7.78% in the months when export taxes took effect. “U.S. consumers not only paid producers’ gains, but also the losses that resulted from the export taxes,” Parajuli said. In the long term, the U.S. would need to work with Canada to negotiate a new softwood lumber agreement, according to Parajuli. Germany, Sweden and other trade partners simply don’t have the inventory or capacity to displace Canada in lumber exports.
The Biden administration is dropping its efforts to issue a policy to protect old-growth forests — though the president previously touted protecting such forests as an important component of his climate agenda. Late Tuesday, Forest Service Chief Randy Moore announced that the agency did not plan to move forward with proposed protections for old trees. The Forest Service also published a letter Moore wrote to regional officials. That letter cited “place-based differences that we will need to understand in order to conserve old growth forests.” …However, with the transition to the second Trump administration looming, even some environmental advocates say halting the effort may have been a savvy move. Alex Craven, for the Sierra Club, noted that a congressional repeal could prevent future Democratic administrations from pursuing a substantially similar rule in the future. …Biden’s proposal to protect the forests had garnered pushback from Republicans and the timber industry.
