United States President Donald Trump has signed a series of executive orders imposing new 50 percent tariffs on a broad range of Canadian imports, accusing Canada of maintaining discriminatory trade policies against American products.
According to the White House, the new tariffs will take effect in 30 days and will apply to goods including wine, hockey sticks and cement. The administration said the duties were imposed under Section 338 of the Tariff Act of 1930, marking the first known use of the decades-old provision.
The move follows the invalidation of several of Trump’s earlier tariff measures by the U.S. Supreme Court earlier this year.
The White House said the new tariffs will not apply to energy products, potash or goods already subject to existing sector-specific tariffs. However, products previously exempt under the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA) will no longer enjoy that protection.
Reacting to the development, Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney described the tariffs as another unilateral trade action by Washington and argued that they violate the terms of the USMCA.
Carney said Canada was prepared to intensify negotiations with the United States and had already proposed measures aimed at resolving outstanding trade disputes and modernising the regional trade agreement.
He maintained that Canada’s previous responses had merely matched U.S. trade actions and reaffirmed Ottawa’s commitment to protecting its economic interests.
The Trump administration defended the decision, accusing Canada of retaliating against American trade policies since 2025. It also criticised Canadian provinces for removing U.S.-made alcoholic beverages from store shelves and cited Canada’s dairy policies and restrictions affecting American vehicle exports.
U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer said the tariffs were intended to hold Canada accountable for what he described as discriminatory trade practices and retaliatory actions against American exports.
Trade experts, however, warned that the use of Section 338 could face significant legal scrutiny, noting that the provision has never previously been used to impose tariffs.
Scott Lincicome of the Cato Institute argued that the law had largely been overtaken by more recent trade legislation, while former U.S. trade official Ryan Majerus described the move as legally risky but potentially intended to strengthen Washington’s bargaining position in ongoing USMCA negotiations.
Industry groups also expressed concern over the possible economic consequences of the latest measures.
Chris Swonger, President of the Distilled Spirits Council of the United States, welcomed the administration’s attention to Canada’s restrictions on American alcohol but cautioned that a prolonged trade dispute could negatively affect businesses already facing economic challenges.
Analysts also questioned the administration’s criticism of Canada’s dairy policies, noting that some of the contested measures stem from Canada’s trade commitments with the European Union.
They warned that any legal challenge to the tariffs could prolong uncertainty for businesses and investors on both sides of the U.S.-Canada border.