If you're going to talk about canadian dairy tariffs, please note that (a) this was originally negotiated by trump the last time he was in office, and (b) the tariff only applies when the total imports exceed a limit, which iirc has never actually been exceeded.

I think the idea is that tariffs cut both ways. They increase prices for foreign goods as well as reduce demand for imports causing job losses in the exporting country. The original tariffs increase prices and the retaliatory tariffs reduce demand for American products causing job loss.

It all comes down to who has pricing power. If Canadian exporters can raise prices without unduly harming sales, then the tariffs on their goods are predominantly paid by American consumers. If the US cannot, then the tariffs on their goods are predominantly paid by American exporters (and must be absorbed by reducing profit margins).

Whether or not that is true, I have no idea. One would expect there to be enough diversity of trade that on the balance it cannot be that lopsided, but maybe that's wrong. It is certainly possible for one side of a trade war to be hurt both coming and going, without any logical inconsistency.

Agreed that "Canada is taxing you back" doesn't make sense. But "America is taxing Canada" makes even less sense. Sorry, just no. America is taxing Americans, Canada is taxing Canadians, these taxes harm exports and imports.

Also, we've never had fully free trade. You can whine about dairy, we can whine about unfair lumber tariffs. These are all part of CUMSA, an agreement that has been illegally violated every damn day under Trump's regime. Let's just cut to the chase. If Trump won't honour CUMSA why make any deal with him? There is no reason he'll honour any new agreement either. He was the one who negotiated CUMSA in the first place.

I think you are reading way too much into that "you" in that sentence. I read it simply as a list and total of all the retaliatory tariffs that Canada is imposing, and the site emphasizes that this is obviously bad for American jobs, not that American consumers pay the tariffs that Canada is imposing.

This whole trade war with Canada has to be one of the dumbest fucking things I have ever witnessed, and that's saying a lot given the complete incompetence and buffoonery of the current US administration. First they had to imitate Idiocracy with the the WFC fight on the White House lawn, now they're imitating South Park by killing relations with Canada. Heck, a big joke in the original South Park movie was that it was so inconceivable that of all countries Canada is the one we'd have a war with, but Trump just wants to speed run to every country on the planet hating our guts.

That is definitely a flatly wrong statement. Unfortunately, it reinforces the Trumpian disinformation that tariffs are fees that other countries pay us... or something.

Trump is taxing Americans when he imposes tariffs. Canada is taxing Canadians when they impose retaliatory tariffs.

And FWIW, most economists think retaliatory tariffs are stupid - on net they cause more harm to the retaliating country than if there were no retaliation. But the politics around tariffs are stupid too. It's all stupid.

> This seems illogical.

It is. When Canada imposes retaliatory tariffs, it is of course a tax on Canadians. Though it is also a market inducement, and one of the complaints of the admin is that Canada's retaliatory vehicle tariffs -- literally mirroring the tariffs the US applied to Canada -- caused a 22% drop in imports.

> import duties on American products which also must be treated in the same fashion for this analysis - Canadian imposed tariffs on dairy

Can you tell us if those import duties are in the room with us? Because you know they didn't exist, right?

There have been $0 in tariffs on US dairy. The tariffs only come into play when the US imports pass a certain volume -- and precisely the same tariffs happen in both directions -- and the US hasn't. Now the US has complained that there are administrative barriers, and maybe so, but they sure aren't clear on what they are, and lie about everything constantly.

Prior to this trade war, there was essentially 0% tariffs on products from the US. And the only reason there is a trade "deficit" is because of massive amounts of Alberta oil that the US desperately needs. I mean, it's hilarious that Trump was literally celebrating bringing back Keystone XL, and increasing the flow of Alberta oil, while simultaneously complaining essentially about that very same oil.

This is, as the WSJ named it, the stupidest trade war in history. All for yet another distraction, as Trump's entire base just desperately need to puff their little chests and celebrate when they think he is punching down on someone. Even if it makes their lives worse and their lot worse.

First, I agree with your complaint about that wording.

Aside from that, the "obvious" dairy tariffs you speak of are almost entirely theoretical. Those are anti-dumping tariffs that kick-in only when a certain threshold has been met. It never has.

That's not to say there aren't trade barriers. The US side argues that there are market barriers that make reaching those quotas impossible [0]. It's a fair point and worth discussing. But let's call it what it is: it's a dispute about opening up a potential new market. Nobody has been over-charged and no American farmers have been "ripped off" (quoting DJT).

If the end result is the same, do the details matter? Absolutely. Being overcharged or ripped off is something that gets people heated, (which is exactly why Trump uses that inflammatory language). Being denied market access because of administrative hurdles to a small-ish niche in a relatively small market like Canada? Not so much.

Please don't repeat the falsehood that dairy tariffs are an "obvious" example of where Canada has imposed fees on American companies. The truth is more nuanced.

[0] https://www.farmprogress.com/farm-policy/the-real-story-behi...

It's really not that complicated imo...

So what do you do when your government is effectively bankrupt? You’ve accumulated more debt than you can realistically repay without imposing enormous economic pain, but you still need to keep the country functioning. One historical answer is an inflationary cycle combined with a trade war.

You impose tariffs on foreign goods, which creates government revenue while also making imported goods more expensive. You then blame the resulting price increases on foreign competitors and trading partners. But the tariffs themselves are inflationary because businesses ultimately pass much of those higher costs on to consumers.

As prices rise, nominal tax revenues also rise because governments are collecting taxes on larger dollar amounts. Meanwhile, governments have an incentive to continue borrowing, spending, and potentially expanding the money supply to deal with their fiscal problems. More money chasing higher-priced goods creates further inflation.

The critical part is what inflation does to existing debt. If you owe $1 trillion in debt today, but inflation dramatically reduces the purchasing power of the dollar over time, that $1 trillion becomes much easier to repay in real terms. The nominal debt remains the same, but its real economic burden shrinks.

So you can end up with a feedback loop: tariffs increase prices, higher prices increase nominal tax receipts, fiscal pressure encourages more borrowing and monetary expansion, monetary expansion fuels more inflation, and inflation gradually erodes the real value of the government's existing debt.

In other words, rather than explicitly defaulting on the debt, you can effectively "inflate it away." The creditors get paid back in dollars, but those dollars are worth substantially less than the dollars they originally lent.

The danger is that this isn't free money. The cost is ultimately transferred to consumers, savers, wage earners, and holders of government debt through reduced purchasing power. And once inflation expectations become entrenched, controlling the cycle can become extremely difficult without causing a recession or other severe economic disruption.

A handful of people I used to work with lost their US manufacturing jobs in 2025 by exactly this mechanism. Their job was assembling products from components built in China, for export to Europe. Their inputs got new tariffs in 2025, and European retaliatory tariffs hit them on the other end. The jobs were moved to a factory in China.

Trump tariffs aren’t for economics reasons. He’s using that as a bullying tactic. It’s pretty obvious given that each tantrum is followed by a new tariff

Protectionism and tariffs simply don't work in the global world.

Capitalism will keep producing things where they make sense not where politicians want.

Exceptions make sense only to protect industries that are absolutely vital and critical for security. Ship building should be one of those for countries like US or UK.

Or when you want to kickstart an industry and need to protect it for a limited amount of time (Koreans and the Japanese both did so with some of their industrial sectors, but it was always time limited).

This administration thinks it can make every industry thrive through tariffs.

I don't see how it can work, even for a country with the resources of the US.

I totally disagree. The same factory would be made infeasible without the tariff.

What do we need that shouldn't make domesticially?

>We purchased a Subaru Outback right around the first round of tarrifs. We were in the market for the base trim, no bells & whistles. We ended up getting the highest trim bc all the remaining base trims were post-tarrifs and and cost $3.5k more than the pre-tarrif higher trim that was already in the lot.

The average car on the road is ~15 years old. The actual lifetime is likely higher. Therefore for proper tariff accounting, your subaru's contribution to this year's tariffs should be 3500/15 = $233, not $3.5k. Not to mention much of the items people buy are either:

1. domestically produced (this includes housing, the biggest cost for most people)

2. tariff exempt (think oil)

3. produced abroad, but have fat markups

I wouldn't say that's an underestimate. It just sounds like you're the one bringing the average up

Not everyone is buying brand new cars

Claude built the site, it's obvious from the style.

Which is to say that anybody with a $200 subscription and access to Namecheap and Netlify could have built the site in one hour flat. There's no longer any need for an NGO, media nonprofit, or lobbying group to build such things; the effort required has been reduced to near-zero, so anybody can do it.

Why does it matter? The data sources are cited and are publicly available.

It's basically just documenting the utter stupidity of a trade war with a close ally with whom we are tightly coupled economically.

> What does "sits in headings Canada taxes" mean?

My guess would be it's refering to the Harmonized System[1], used to classify goods on import and export declarations:

The HS is organized into 21 Sections, which are subdivided into 96 Chapters (Chapters 1 to 97 with Chapter 77 reserved for potential future use by the HS). The 96 HS Chapters are further subdivided into 1,228 headings and 5,612 subheadings in the current 2022 edition of the HS.

Most countries have additional subdivisions, for example in US the HS is used as a basis for the Harmonized Tariff Schedule[2].

The classification is used to determine tariffs, taxes and restrictions, but those are often applied to the broader groups, so covering say all imported aluminum, rather than say aluminum of a particular kind for use in a particular sector.

> Whatever this means, how does it jump to $26.5B from $16.0B on a single date?

Because Canada announced it will impose tariffs on more types of goods on that day, ie more headings, affecting more of the exported value.

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harmonized_System#Structure

[2]: https://hts.usitc.gov/

It is AI slop, which has the veneer of sense without the substance. https://cymerys.com/w/im-becoming-ai-blind

It is AI slop. It was written using Claude Code.

The language is very like Claude Code with Opus 5: no prepositions, unclear references, ambiguous, bad phrase transitions, ...

And the css is exactly the same that Claude Code uses for its artifacts and documentation.

You mean like Carney did in January? Trump cannot be shown reason once he has convinced himself his gut feel is correct.

it was only registered today. many places will block new domains, for a customizable definition of 'new'.

America's trade imbalance with Canada is basically crude oil. Which they get at a significant discount because it's much more expensive to export anywhere else.

America then refines it and exports it as finished product or uses it internally -- one of the reasons why America has relatively cheap gasoline prices.

This "trade imbalance" is a massive benefit to America.

> Does the US have a trade imbalance that causes problems, particularly in our manufacturing sector?

I have a trade imbalance with the local grocery store: I buy lots of vegetables, but they don't buy mine.

My employer has a trade imbalance with me: They buy lots of my labor, but I never buy any of theirs.

The term has become unhelpfully pejorative, the "imbalance" is often desirable and beneficial.

Its all a precursor to setting up a reason to invade Canada. If Canada moves on with a threat to do something with energy then buckle up.

Every side benefits from a trade. That's why the trade is made. The US is able to afford a trader imbalance because the USD is the world's reserve currency. Other countries are subsidizing our trade imbalance. It's a huge win for the US.

Tariffs will not bring back manufacturing. They increase prices of inputs, reduce incentive for competitiveness and invite retaliation. Look how well tariffs have worked for Brazil and Argentina or for the US under Smoot Hawley.

> Really, you need to instill some sort of sense of duty to country in business leaders

Goods are imported because business is a competition and consumers prefer cheap imported goods. Its not like american executives flatly want to offshore, if a competitor does and they dont their customers will leave. The only solution business leaders can have here is collusion, which is illegal. If we want goods to be manufactured domestically it is on us as consumers to buy domestic products over cheap imported ones.

I mostly agree, except that trade imbalances are not problems and don't really cause problems.

Buying and selling don't need to be equal between buyers and sellers, and it's really just an incoherent idea.

at this point one can't really assume it was about picking a tariff fight with Canada any more than the Gaza peace plan was about bringing peace to Gaza. guy is just a shit-thrower. that's his one move, throw some shit and see what he can get out of it. walk into a restaurant and claim that he's been treated so badly they're going to have to sign the whole thing over to him, and settle for 10 free meals and a pack of steaks from the walk-in.

But does America have a trade imbalance with Canada?

Canada has things that our economy needs desperately (e.g. potash).

As an American, I don't see see how you can separate this trade talk from the constant, explicit threats to Canadian sovereignty by Trump - threats he's carried out in reality against Iran, Venezuela, and Cuba. And now economically against Canada.

It isn't just "which Americans consider trade with Canada to be a real issue," it is "which Americans think Canada should become a territory of the United States."

It's just plainly absurd. It is inexplicable to me that Congress doesn't act. And infuriating to me that my representatives in Congress don't do more (even though they are in the opposition.)

It became an issue when Canada did not bow down to Trump's 51st state demand. With Trump's vindictive nature and narcissistic disorder, you get this situation. It is actually completely unsurprising if you think about it.

> Really, you need to instill some sort of sense of duty to country in business leaders, which is a far heavier lift, but this at least puts a number to it.

The bigger problem is, when consumers have the choice between cheap crap from Aliexpress et al and (vastly) more expensive made-in-<own country>, usually only the affluent who want to show off will be able to choose the latter.

And that is a socially explosive thing in the long term... the masses, especially the rural ones, really do not like it if they feel that they can only afford subpar crap while the "rich urban librul elite" gets access to the good stuff.

That is the stuff that in the best case fuels populist movements, in the worst case revolutions.

(And on top of that, often enough "made-in-<own country>" is bordering the legally required limit on domestic production or is outright just slapping a label and repackaging the Thing)

It matters what the reality is. The trade war between the US and Canada is bad. It is entirely the fault of the administration that is currently in charge in the US. That is the reality.

I share your disdain for political team sportism. But not everything is indecipherable without requiring that lens, and that is unusually often the case with this particular administration.

> People are saying that Canada is too small to win this trade war

Anyone who says this is an idiot. People have sacrificed far more for far less. As you pointed out this is existential for canada. It is just so, so hard to win a fight that the other side sees as existential when you dont.

> imagine the level of stupid that's going down if the Dems do not also get get the Senate

The Senate, literally by design, does not represent the will of the people. Add things like gerrymandering on top and the uphill climb required of Democrats to capture the Senate keeps getting higher and higher.

They know the stick is huge but with how everything is going with US and the TACO mentality they feel US will be back on the table once the reality starts hitting.

The whole story about why the talks failed:

https://www.nytimes.com/2026/08/25/world/canada/trump-carney...

US having veto over Canada trade negotiations, dictating language policy which could cause Quebec to cede from Canada, and stop the "buy Canadian" policy put after the last tariff round etc. It not even a stick anymore it is a proper gun which blow in the face of any Canadian who agrees to these terms.

USMCA (and the 2 deals that preceded it) are definitely better deals for the US than they are for Canada. But they're fairly generally believed to be win-win deals; it's just that the US wins more than Canada.

If you're playing a single football game, the lesser winner is the loser. However, the economy is not a single football game. In real life the lesser winner is still a winner.

Did the cancelled/refunded tarrifs have serious consequences of US customers?

It does. The ones who hurt scream the loudest.

How do figure Canada will suffer more?

>Canada is very unfortunately caught in the trade war between the USA and China.

canada is very unfortunately caught in the trade war between the USA and canada

Canada generally doesn't have much problem coordinating with the US on tariffs on Chinese goods. A primary example is Chinese Vehicles. The trouble is that by launching a trade war against Canada, the US has lost the willingness of Canadians to participate in such coordination.

Re: Canadian dollars, it's the US dollar that I believe is the more salient concern [0]

[0] https://www.morningstar.com/news/dow-jones/20260825307/bitco...

> Canada is very unfortunately caught in the trade war between the USA and China

Ottawa is fighting Anchluss. The MAGA wing is entirely serious about annexing Canada.

Carney, for a change, is right. Canada is being attacked.

It is more than Chinese steel: https://www.nytimes.com/2026/08/25/world/canada/trump-carney...

Asking them to change French programming laws, and stopping the "Buy Canadian goods" law etc.

>It's pretty easy right now for certain goods to bypass the US tariffs by being transshipped through Canada and enter the USA without tariff because of minimal processing.

This talking point keeps getting repeated on HN. Always without sources because the only source is a dubious White House "report" that is nothing more than a manufactured reason for buying an expensive new AI system (probably from a big donor). https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2026/08/The-Gr...

That same report equally names the European Union, India, Israel, Japan, Mexico, South Korea, and Taiwan alongside Canada. So literally every modern western economy is making this "pretty easy"? Yeah, ok.

No, Canada is just the last in line of this US administration's mission of alienating and pissing off every single ally while bending to enemies and Israel.

What does any of that matter for speculative discussions?

Is hacker news going to be at the table?