As trade talks intensify between the US and Canada, those in the forest industry await what will happen with that long-term irritant of a trade file – softwood lumber. The US Lumber Coalition’s (USLC) July 2, 2025 press release, “US Self-Reliance in Softwood Lumber Hamstrung by Canadian Unfair Trade” made several inaccurate claims about the Canadian industry and softwood lumber trade. With sensitive and critical US-Canada trade negotiations ongoing, as well as the potential outcomes of the US Section 232 investigation on lumber imports, it is important to make sure there is correct information and understanding available to support both countries with meaningful dialogue. As industry consultants based in British Columbia, we are compelled to correct a number of the USLC’s claims made which provide misleading perspectives of the Canadian forest industry and its softwood lumber exports to the US market. Our goal is to apply facts against these claims together with additional commentary that we believe will provide a more accurate assessment of the US and Canada softwood lumber situation. [go to Spar Tree Group Inc. or Russ Taylor Global for full list of ‘claims and responses’, or click Read More below]

…The longer-term objective of making the US more self-reliant on domestic lumber is only a notional strategy at this point. Canada is already the high-cost supplier to the US market – in part from US import duties – and imposing higher duties (and tariffs) on imported Canadian lumber will only increase lumber prices to US consumers for years to come. It is unfortunate that the USLC makes so many unsubstantiated claims, which are designed to simply evoke emotional reactions. A clear and supported analysis of the facts with defined assumptions is a much better way to improve the dialogue and create accurate communication. The US and Canada need to work together to grow their collective share of wood products in the North American market and not to push for short-term, non-market duties and tariffs that will have potentially long-term consequences. Efforts to promote wood over steel and concrete are a much better longer-term strategy.