Tarifas

As Canadians fight for the right to pay more for dairy products…

A trade war between Canada and the United States that keeps ratcheting up will only lead to more pain for everyday Canadians.

When President Donald Trump imposes tariffs on Canadian goods going into the United States, it makes those goods more expensive for Americans. And every time Canadian politicians decide to slap tariffs on American goods coming into Canada as a response, life becomes more unaffordable for Canadians.

That’s because tariffs are taxes imposed on domestic consumers. They are not, contrary to messaging coming out of the White House, taxes paid for by foreign countries.

Of course, Canadians want to see their leaders respond when Trump imposes tariffs on Canadian goods being sold to the United States. Trump’s tariffs are poised to cause Canada’s GDP to contract by between 2.5 and 3 per cent this year, which will surely cause a recession.

But hitting back with tariffs of our own only increases the pain being felt by Canadian consumers and will only deepen the recession Canadians are staring down this year.

Australia’s political leaders seem to have figured this out. Their government is choosing not to respond in kind to Trump’s tariffs on Australian steel and aluminium.

“Tariffs and escalating trade tensions are a form of economic self-harm and a recipe for slower growth and higher inflation,” disse Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese. “They are paid for by consumers. This is why Australia will not be imposing reciprocal tariffs on the United States.”

How, then, should Canada respond to Trump’s tariffs? Here are just two of many solutions: tearing down internal trade barriers and unleashing Canadian energy.

Many Canadians would be stunned to know that Canada has trade barriers between our provinces that are nearly as high as the tariffs Trump imposed on Canada earlier this month.

That’s right: because of roughly 400 carve-outs to Canada’s internal free trade deal, goods being traded from one province to another face the equivalent of a 21 per cent tariff on average.

Canadians are rightly indignant at the tariffs the U.S. administration has imposed on Canada. But Canadians should also be angry at our provincial governments, which have created a system of internal trade barriers that, prior to the current trade war, made it easier to trade with the U.S. than within Canada.

That must change.

Nova Scotia Premier Tim Houston is leading the way on this file and has prometido to remove Nova Scotia’s barriers to trade with any other province that will reciprocate. And the federal government has sent signals that the provinces appear willing to move quickly to tear down internal trade barriers given the circumstances.

Canada’s provinces must agree to tear down all internal trade barriers as quickly as possible. The boon this would be for the national economy would virtually offset the impact of the Trump tariffs.

The federal government must also stop shooting the Canadian economy in the foot by blockading crucial energy projects that represent the key to diversifying our international trade.

Since the Liberals came to power in 2015, they have blocked more than $670 billion worth of energy projects that would have sent western Canadian oil, natural gas, and petroleum products to eastern Canada, Europe, and Asia. 

Canada should be an energy superpower, but for the past decade the feds have stood in the way.

It’s time to get energy projects built and allow our energy to power the world. Right now, most of our energy exports go to the United States. With better pipeline infrastructure, Canada can diversify and send more oil and natural gas to Europe and Asia, two regions desperate to get more clean and ethical Canadian energy.

Under the Trudeau government, countries from Europe and Asia begged the feds to develop more Canadian energy and export it to the world. Former prime minister Justin Trudeau told them there was no business case.

That sentiment was wrong then and it’s even more wrong now. It’s time to build pipelines and sell Canadian energy to the rest of the world. Pronto.

Canada should respond to U.S. tariffs by making our economy more self-reliant and by exporting more of our key products to new markets.

The Trump tariff threat will be present for the next four years. Slapping more taxes on Canadians isn’t a long-term solution. Diversifying our economy is.

Publicado originalmente aqui

Beyond the trade war, Ford’s to-do list is long

Ontarians are also watching Ford closely to make sure he doesn’t take his eye off the ball when it comes to other critical issues. Pictured: Ontario Premier Doug Ford. Photo Credit: Doug Ford/X. 

After a cold and snow-filled election, Ontario Premier Doug Ford emerged as the victor, although he did not make the electoral gains he had hoped for. He was given the third mandate he desired to lead Ontarians through a difficult time marked by a trade war and a fracturing relationship with the United States. However, Ontarians are also watching him closely to make sure he doesn’t take his eye off the ball when it comes to other critical issues. 

Tariffs are not the only government policies set to harm Ontario consumers in the days, months, and years of this renewed majority government. Interprovincial trade, housing, alcohol policy, and broadband internet are all topics that are important to Ontarians and must be addressed. 

Canada’s premiers have long put interprovincial trade on the backburner, seeing it as something that was nice in theory but too difficult to achieve in practice. They wasted an enormous amount of time not making it a reality for the good of Canadian consumers and as an escape hatch in case of economic disaster like the one Canadians are now facing in a Canada-United States trade war. The lack of interprovincial free trade is costing consumers immensely, already by robbing our economy of more than $200 billion a year. Other premiers need to follow Nova Scotia Premier Tim Houston’s lead immediately and introduce reciprocal domestic trade legislation. Ford has indicated he plans to do just that, but he should make it an early priority for his new government. 

In addition to interprovincial trade, Ford should set to work coordinating with the federal government to ensure Ontario diversifies its economy by building trade relationships with countries other than the United States. Consumers benefit when they have more economic choice, and this will allow for items to be exported and imported at a lower cost with much more stable and predictable partners. 

Ontarians feeling the financial pinch are more than likely also struggling to buy a home. The election was full of ideas and promises when it comes to housing, with the most prominent being rent control from Marit Stiles, the leader of Ontario’s NDP. Economists have long argued that rent control is actually very bad for low-income people looking for housing. However, even though Ford has peeled back this bad policy, the housing crisis persists. 

There is a housing crisis because there are not enough units to house people. And there are not enough units to house people because of outdated red-tape from the federal, provincial, and municipal governments. The Ford government is falling short of its own housing targets. Ford can take ownership of the slowdown experienced at the provincial level and work with his federal and municipal colleagues to make it easier and more attractive for builders to build. Ford has announced billions of dollars in new spending on housing and other projects, but this will turn out to be meaningless if developers are stuck in red tape. 

On the alcohol front, Ford has done more than any other premier in Ontario history to liberalize alcohol sales, but there is more to be done that will benefit both Ontario consumers and small and medium-sized businesses. The LCBO remains the only retail store that can sell spirits. Ontarians looking to buy whisky, vodka, or gin from their grocery or convenience stores are out of luck. Why liberalize alcohol and get stuck on this very simple detail? If wine can be sold in grocery stores, so too should vodka. The LCBO should be given less power, not niche areas of control. 

Ford should also promise not to build any more LCBO retail spaces, and indeed close retail stores that are no longer needed due to the amount of convenience and grocery stores surrounding it, and save the Ontario consumer money on retail rent and on running an inefficient operation. If you compare the LCBO’s operations to comparable private retailers in Alberta, it costs the LCBO approximately $1,000,000 more per store in operation costs. With 669 LCBO stores being inefficiently run in Ontario, that’s a lot of wasted money the government could otherwise spend on Ontarians’ core priorities, making the problem even worse simply doesn’t make financial sense. 

Finally, Ford has, under pressure, ripped up the contract Ontario had with Starlink. While perhaps understandable given the current trade dispute, the bad news is that Starlink was supposed to provide desperately needed high-speed internet access to 15,000 homes and businesses in rural and remote communities by June 2025. Now that this contract is cancelled, and assuming the relationship between the province and Elon Musk’s company is now strained, Ford must put significant effort into finding alternative companies to take on that project. It is outrageous that rural Ontarians do not have access to reliable internet when the economy and their lives rely on being online. Businesses in rural Ontario are also struggling to succeed in a modern economy without access to the internet, and the lifeline they thought was coming is now no longer an option. Businesses that are already in rural areas are struggling, and businesses who many want to start in rural areas will be scared away. This will only depress the local economy and isolate rural communities even further from the rest of the province.

Ford would do well to keep in mind that Ontario is a complex province with many problems to be addressed, even during a trade war and in its aftermath. Ontarians elected him to guide them through this turbulent time, but also to strengthen the economy, make their lives more consumer-friendly, and support the growth of businesses in the province. While much of the present focus is on the trade war, Ontarians still have many other pressing issues that need to be dealt with.

Publicado originalmente aqui

Carney must change feds’ approach in dealing with trade war

Canada is set to get a new prime minister at a moment when the stakes could not be higher: the nation is in the midst of an unprecedented trade conflict with its biggest trading partner.

To date, the federal Liberal government has lacked a sense of urgency in responding to the crisis. Mark Carney, Canada’s prime minister-designate, has a chance to change that by shifting the feds’ approach to energy projects and eliminating internal trade barriers.

U.S. President Donald Trump has been talking about imposing tariffs on Canada for the past three months. Unfortunately, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau spent months acting as if the tariff threat wasn’t real.

Trudeau only belatedly started taking actions to strengthen Canada’s border security as the clock ticked down the zero hour, in a desperate last-minute attempt to meet Trump’s demands.

Yet according to Trump, Trudeau failed to take enough action. Some punishing tariffs are already hammering Canada’s economy, while others are set to take effect early next month.

It’s long been evident that Trump’s decision to impose sweeping tariffs on Canada’s economy is not just about fentanyl crossing the border: less than one per cent of the fentanyl entering the United States comes through the northern border. 

His major goal is clearly to cripple Canada’s economy in an attempt to get companies to move their jobs and economic activity to the United States.

How should Canada respond?

There are at least two key areas where immediate action is needed: unleashing Canadian energy and tearing down Canada’s internal trade barriers.

Since the Liberals came to power in 2015, $670 billion worth of natural resource projects have either been cancelled or put on hold by the federal government.

The feds have blockaded projects like Energy EastNorthern Gateway, e Énergie Saguenay that would have sent tens of billions of dollars’ worth of Canadian oil and natural gas to Asia and Europe, and allowed eastern Canada to be powered by Canadian energy rather than importing oil from dictatorships like Saudi Arabia.

Não menos que 77 por cento of Canada’s exports go to the United States, including $150 billion per year in oil, natural gas, and petroleum products. Canada needs to diversify. Trump’s tariff threats should have led to a sense of urgency, with the federal government reversing course and greenlighting some of the 31 energy projects it has stymied since coming to power in 2015.

Sadly, no action has been taken on the energy front. Just talk that the Liberals might have to reconsider their position on pipelines.

Carney is a well-known climate hawk. He’s talked about the need for 80 por cento of Canada’s natural resources to stay in the ground to fight climate change. 

But the moment demands a different approach. Unleashing Canadian energy is the key to diversifying our economy. Carney should shift the feds’ approach and approve energy projects that have been blocked over the past decade. If he doesn’t, Canadians will look to elect a new government that will.

Then there’s internal trade. Canada does have domestic free trade, but with a major caveat. There are more than 400 carve-outs to Canada’s internal free trade deal. The impact of those carve-outs is dramatic.

Because of the provinces’ non-tariff barriers on each other’s goods, Canada has a de facto 21 per cent domestic tariff when provinces want to trade with each other, according to the International Monetary Fund.

That means it’s easier to trade with a couple dozen countries Canada has free trade agreements with than it is for provinces to trade with each other.

Studies have shown that ending interprovincial trade barriers should be a bigger boost to the national economy than the cost of the tariffs the Trump administration has imposed on Canada.

Canada’s internal trade minister, Anita Anand, says progress has been made on eliminating int.erprovincial trade barriers, but the proof will be in the pudding.

Carney should convene a meeting of Canada’s first ministers immediately and demand that all internal trade barriers be torn down within 30 days.

Canada can’t afford to wait a moment longer.

Make no mistake: the Trudeau government has been behind the curve in responding to the Trump administration’s tariffs threats since day one. Carney has a chance to take a new approach by changing the feds’ approach to energy projects and finally pushing for a comprehensive deal on internal free trade.

If he fails to get this done, or lets ideology get in the way, Canadians will quickly be searching for a new prime minister who will.

Publicado originalmente aqui

Up and about Trump’s tariffs: Cheaper foods for Malaysia?

BAKER Nuradilla Hamdan is concerned about the ripple effects of the United States’ recent and impending tariffs on imports from several countries.

The 28-year-old single mother from Cheras worries that the rising costs of imported ingredients, such as butter, may eventually force her to raise the prices of her cakes.

“In my five years as a baker, I’ve learned that price increases can be unpredictable. I’m already paying more for butter and wheat flour, which means my cakes are becoming more expensive. But I can’t keep passing the cost onto my customers,” she says.

The US recently imposed a 25% tariff on imports from Mexico and Canada, along with a 10% increase in duties on Chinese goods, which came into effect on March 4. US President Donald Trump has also announced reciprocal tariffs on the rest of the world, to come into effect on April 2.

This has raised concerns about the potential impact on Malaysian food security and affordability, particularly as Malaysia imports over 60% of its food needs.

Beyond price hikes, experts warn that escalating trade wars could fuel global protectionism. Adding to the uncertainty is the unpredictable nature of US tariff policies – just last week, Trump signed orders significantly expanding exemptions for goods from Canada and Mexico, leaving policymakers scrambling to adapt to shifting trade conditions. (Then at press time Trump threatened other new tariffs, including a 250% tax on Canada’s dairy products.)

Nevertheless, some Malaysian economic and geopolitical experts believe the new tariffs could indirectly benefit Malaysia if affected countries shift their trade focus to this region.

Leia o texto completo aqui

Tariffs on Imports From Canada and Mexico Are Still a Terrible Idea

During a cabinet meeting on Wednesday, President Donald Trump acknowledged that Americans don’t like high prices.

“We have to get the prices down,” Trump contou reporters. “The prices of eggs and various other things. Eggs are a disaster.”

Part of his administration’s solution to the high price of eggs? More imports. As part of a $1 billion plan to combat the bird flu, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) announced this week that it would seek to expand imports of eggs, Jornal de Wall Street relatórios.

The U.S. is a major global supplier of eggs, so reversing those supply chains is not easy (and eggs are perishable goods, which makes it more difficult), but the maneuver is evidence that at least some members of the Trump administration grasp that prices are the result of supply and demand. A sudden constraint on supply—in this case, the bird flu—has pushed prices higher, and finding alternative suppliers might help ease the pain.

Leia o texto completo aqui

Houston charts path forward on interprovincial trade

Leaders across Canada have talked a good game about eliminating interprovincial trade barriers. Nova Scotia Premier Tim Houston is putting his money where his mouth is.

There can be no doubt about it: Interprovincial trade barriers are holding Canada’s economy back. The rules and regulations preventing the free flow of goods, services and workers across provincial borders is costing our economy more than $200 billion a year.

With U.S. President Donald Trump promising to bring in sweeping tariffs as soon as next week that would devastate the Canadian economy, it’s never been clearer that we need to trade more at home and boost economic activity within our borders.

Enter Houston.

At a campaign stop in support of Ontario Premier Doug Ford’s re-election bid, Houston announced plans to table a bill called the Free Trade and Mobility Within Canada Act in the Nova Scotia Legislature.

The legislation would take a reciprocal approach to trade barriers: According to Houston, Nova Scotia will eliminate any barriers standing in the way of trade with another province so long as that other province responds in kind.

In other words, so long as any other province is willing to drop its trade barriers and allow Nova Scotia’s goods, services, and workers to flow freely across its borders, Nova Scotia will do the same.

Canada’s internal trade barriers now represent the equivalent of a 21% tariff. Eliminating those barriers is critical.

Houston’s new legislation could be a game changer for the Canadian economy. Once Nova Scotia passes this bill into law, the onus will be on other provinces to reciprocate: if they want more access to the Nova Scotia market, all they have to do is remove trade barriers of their own.

In the past, provinces have been reluctant to remove trade barriers for a number of reasons. One is that even if a province removes a trade barrier, there’s no guarantee that other provinces that benefit from the elimination of that barrier will respond in kind.

Houston’s legislation would require Nova Scotia to reciprocate action taken by any other province, offering a guarantee that a gesture of goodwill won’t go unmatched.

The proposed legislation could lead to a domino effect. Ontario, for example, might see the benefits of reciprocal trade with Nova Scotia and could choose to introduce similar legislation to facilitate more reciprocal trade with other provinces.

By having politicians commit to matching each other’s moves toward freer trade, they don’t have to take a leap of faith when they stand up to special interest groups and tear down trade barriers.

Houston’s move comes at a critical time. Trump is threatening to introduce punishing across-the-board tariffs as soon as next week. Canada needs to be doing everything possible to strengthen the domestic economy to head off the impact of those tariffs.

Exports represent more than one-third of Canada’s GDP and 77% of Canada’s exports go to the United States. It’s hard to overstate just how devastating U.S. tariffs would be on Canada’s economy.

That’s why strengthening internal trade, in concert with growing Canada’s exports to markets other than the United States, will be crucial in the months ahead.

But unlike trading with other countries, where complex bilateral agreements must be negotiated, internal trade barriers in Canada could be eliminated tomorrow. All that’s been missing is the will to make it happen.

Houston is showing that eliminating internal trade barriers can be done swiftly. With a single piece of legislation, Houston is laying the groundwork for eliminating Nova Scotia’s trade barriers with other provinces, so long as they do the same.

Provincial governments across the country should follow Houston’s lead, introduce reciprocal domestic trade legislation, and unleash the true potential of Canada’s domestic economy.

Interprovincial trade barriers are holding Canada back at a time when we can least afford it. Canada’s premiers should embrace Houston’s plan to fix it.

Publicado originalmente aqui

Congress set to neuter its authority to counter Trump tariffs

As Congress debates yet another Continuing Resolution to hastily fund the federal government for a few months, the House yesterday passed a resolution that mixes together several bills.

Tucked within these provisions was a legalistic quirk that would end Congress’ ability to end President Trump’s “State of Emergency” that has so far given him some legal latitude to impose swaths of new tariffs and duties that affect consumers.

The resolution passed by the House of Representatives contained four sections for consideration:

1.) Repeal of the IRS rule related to DeFi brokers and registration (also known as the broker role), affecting cryptocurrency platforms.

2.) Opening the state of limitations related to pandemic relief era as provided in the CARES Act.

3.) A Continuing Resolution to fund the government on a temporary basis

4.) Declaring the rest of the year as a single calendar day for the purposes of the National Emergencies Act

While each of these sections should elicit some debate or praise, the last section is purposefully written so as to freeze time on the Congressional calendar.

Why is this important?

The section reads: “Each day for the remainder of the first session of the 119th Congress shall not constitute a calendar day for purposes of section 202 of the National Emergencies Act (50 U.S.C. 1622) with respect to a joint resolution terminating a national emergency declared by the President on February 1, 2025.”

Como relatado by the New York Times, this is a procedural move that would neuter Congress’ ability to pass any vote or resolution to gain back their power to issue tariffs and other trade sanctions, because 15 calendar days will not pass (at least legally) for the remainder of the year:

House Democrats had planned to force a vote on resolutions to end the tariffs on Mexico and Canada, a move allowed under the National Emergencies Act, which provides a mechanism for Congress to terminate an emergency like the one Mr. Trump declared when he imposed the tariffs on Feb. 1.

That would have forced Republicans — many of whom are opposed to tariffs as a matter of principle — to go on the record on the issue at a time when Mr. Trump’s commitment to tariffs has spooked the financial markets and spiked concerns of reigniting inflation.

The national emergency law lays out a fast-track process for Congress to consider a resolution ending a presidential emergency, requiring committee consideration within 15 calendar days after one is introduced and a floor vote within three days after that.

By passing the resolution, the House Majority has effectively neutered its own authority to set trade policies and to hold the Executive Branch accountable, allowing it to keep the State of Emergency in place so President Trump can issue tariffs on Canada, Mexico, China, the European Union, or any other country without much opposition.

Though the President has some authority to issue tariffs in an emergency situation, according to the National Emergencies Act, removing Congress’ ability to end or even reverse the State of Emergency for the rest of 2025 means Congress has abrogated its responsibility to even have a say on trade policies.

By allowing President Trump to prolong his State of Emergency, there will be no constitutional way for Congress to curb the excesses of the multi-theater trade wars being waged across the world, harming consumers who would otherwise profit from freer trade.

Tariffs are taxes on consumers, and trade wars only make consumers poorer, as Centro de Escolha do Consumidor describes in detail on FreeTrade4Us.org.

Knowing this was a possibility, Kentucky Senator Rand Paul introduced a bill last year to reaffirm the ability of Congress – and Congress alone – to set trade policy and avoid costly tariffs that raise prices for consumers. He called it the “Lei de Não Tributação Sem Representação“.

“Our Constitution was designed to prevent any branch from overstepping its bounds. Unchecked executive actions enacting tariffs tax our citizens, threaten our economy, raise prices for everyday goods, and erode the system of checks and balances that our founders so carefully crafted,” wrote Sen. Paul.

If Congress neuters its ability to counter tariffs, then American consumers will have to continue to bear the brunt of protectionist policies that are currently making them worse off.

President Trump Is Headed Toward a Tariff Backlash

FEB 28, 2025 | President Donald Trump’s compromisso to enact sweeping 25% tariffs on imports from Canada and Mexico begins this Tuesday, March 4. While Trump’s team has used the threat of tariffs to extract concessions from foreign adversaries and allies alike, the notion of open trade war with America’s neighbors remains an unpopular one with most Americans, according to a new votação from Public First.  

“This has a lot of potential to backfire on President Trump as his favorability gap shrinks” said Stephen Kent of the Consumer Choice Center, an international consumer advocacy group.  “Americans certainly elected Donald Trump to reassert US strength around the world and to be extra pushy, but when only 28% of Americans express support for tariffs on Canadian imports it goes to show that American voters don’t see Canada as being an opponent of any kind.” 

Asked why support for tariffs on Mexico is slightly more popular, with 35% of adults supportive, roughly ten percent above views about tariffs on Canada, Kent said,

It’s pretty clear 2024 was an immigration election and Americans wanted to see Mexico brought to the table on restricting northbound migration and fentanyl trafficking. When Mexican President Sheinbaum put 10,000 more troops on the border in exchange for a delay of tariffs, that was the point.

But Americans still know that tariffs are ultimately a tax on their lifestyle and shopping lists.” 

President Trump’s tariff threats have already injected uncertainty into markets and supply chains. After pausing the tariffs in February, the administration’s indecisiveness created confusion for businesses that rely on predictable trade policies. Imposing the 25% tariffs will only escalate tensions, raise consumer prices and distract from Americans’ top concern of trade imbalance with China. 

Polling data from Public First, shared with POLITICO, underscores that tariffs are vastly more popular when it comes to China, with 45 percent of respondents supporting them versus 30 percent opposed. 

“Americans aren’t going to like the result of tariffs on Chinese imports any more than they like the cost increases for basic car repairs in the US after 25% tariffs hit Canada, but the difference is that Donald Trump’s entire political career was based on renegotiating relations with China, not Canada,” added Stephen Kent of the Consumer Choice Center. “If these tariffs go into effect on March 4, I’d expect them to be short-lived. Trump likes to do popular things, and trade war in North America is already unpopular. Americans want to poke fun and enjoy some nationalistic fun when watching hockey games between Canada and the US, not when they’re shopping or trying to fill up their car.”

The Consumer Choice Center’s staff in Canada, Europe, and the US call on the Trump Administration to help make America and its allies prosperous by rejecting trade barriers which limit consumer freedom and purchasing power. Tariffs are not the way. 

FOR MEDIA QUERIES OR INTERVIEWS PLEASE CONTACT:

Stephen Kent

Centro de Escolha do Consumidor

stephen@consumerchoicecenter.org

###

O Consumer Choice Center é um grupo independente e apartidário de defesa do consumidor que defende os benefícios da liberdade de escolha, inovação e abundância na vida cotidiana para consumidores em mais de 100 países. Monitoramos de perto as tendências regulatórias em Washington, Bruxelas, Ottawa, Brasília, Londres e Genebra. www.consumerchoicecenter.org.


As tarifas de amanhã prejudicarão a todos

Por Sabine El-Chidiac e Elizabeth Hicks

Embora as ameaças tarifárias tenham sido uma montanha-russa de ele vai ou não vai, os relatórios indicam que o plano do presidente Donald Trump de aplicar uma tarifa de 25% ao Canadá está a caminho de se tornar realidade em 1º de fevereiro. Dado o dano que as tarifas causam aos canadenses e americanos, o melhor curso de ação seria eliminar as tarifas como uma opção política e se concentrar em resolver os problemas que os Estados Unidos têm com o Canadá diplomaticamente. Não apenas as tarifas dos Estados Unidos seriam devastadoras para as economias americana e canadense, mas as retaliações propostas pelo Canadá prejudicariam ainda mais os bolsos dos cidadãos de ambos os países.

O primeiro-ministro de Ontário, Doug Ford, foi muito claro no que diz respeito às tarifas propostas por Trump: impor tarifas a Ontário, e Ontário poderia cortar eletricidade para 1,5 milhões de lares em Nova York, Michigan e Minnesota. O governo federal também disseram que iriam responder com o “maior golpe comercial que a economia dos EUA já sofreu” se Trump seguir adiante com seu plano de tarifas, e um futuro governo provavelmente se sentirá compelido a faça o mesmo devido às duras implicações econômicas que as tarifas terão sobre o Canadá. Em vez de permitir que tarifas sejam impostas em qualquer ponto, os EUA e o Canadá devem encontrar uma saída para proteger os consumidores em ambos os lados da fronteira. O Canadá precisa de uma nova abordagem baseada na realidade política e nos interesses econômicos únicos de ambas as partes nesta disputa.   

Tarifas são simplesmente outra palavra para impostos, e impor tais impostos ao Canadá afetará a vida cotidiana dos canadenses ainda mais do que a crise do custo de vida já afetou. Economista canadense Trevor Tombe prevê que se os EUA seguirem adiante com as tarifas e o Canadá retaliar, o custo doméstico canadense seria de $1.900 CAD por pessoa anualmente. Nos EUA, esse impacto seria de quase $1.700 CAD por pessoa. Esta é uma das estimativas mais conservadoras.

Os confrontos tarifários tendem a ser mais uma batalha de vontades e menos sobre resultados econômicos positivos. 

A Lei Tarifária Smoot-Hawley dos EUA de 1930 resultou no comércio mundial caindo em 66% e as exportações e importações dos EUA despencando em cerca de dois terços, prolongando a Grande Depressão. Mais recentemente, a crise do aço e do alumínio de 2018 tarifas impostas por Donald Trump resultaram em custos de fabricação exorbitantes para as indústrias dos EUA. As tarifas atuais sobre madeira macia impostas intermitentemente pelos Estados Unidos têm significativamente aumento dos preços das casas americanas.

Em resposta às tarifas Smoot-Hawley, o Canadá retaliou e impôs tarifas severas aos Estados Unidos sob o comando do Primeiro Ministro RB Bennett, enviando os mercados de exportação do Canadá para uma espiral e desencadeando uma depressão econômica canadense. Uma história muito semelhante previsivelmente jogado fora sobre as tarifas de aço e alumínio de 2018 e novamente com o Canadá retaliatório tarifas na disputa pela madeira serrada macia. 

O Canadá é o segundo maior parceiro comercial dos Estados Unidos, com importações do Canadá para os EUA totalizando quase $344 bilhões em 2024 até outubro. O Canadá e os EUA são vizinhos e aliados de longa data, e a integração de nossas cadeias de suprimentos resultou em preços mais baixos para os consumidores nos EUA e Canadá, ao mesmo tempo em que aumentou a competitividade global de ambos os países.

O primeiro-ministro Ford foi promovendo um programa “Fortress Am-Can” que faria com que os EUA e o Canadá trabalhassem como uma equipa em várias questões políticas relacionadas com a energia, e houve retórica do líder do partido Conservador, Pierre Poilievre, sobre a criação de uma “ótimo negócio” com Donald Trump, aumentando as exportações de energia do Canadá para os EUA. Essa direção pode ser uma resposta viável ao impasse tarifário e pode estender essa pausa para uma reversão permanente na política tarifária.

Muitos consumidores canadenses mal conseguem pagar as necessidades da vida, como mantimentos, roupas e moradia. Adicionar tarifas e retaliações à mistura pode ser a gota d'água que leva à próxima grande depressão do Canadá. 

Trump impôs tarifas contra o Canadá hoje?

O recém-empossado presidente dos EUA, Donald Trump, não chegou a implementar tarifas de 25% sobre todas as importações canadenses no primeiro dia, mas deu a entender que a medida poderia estar próxima durante seu discurso de posse na segunda-feira (20 de janeiro).

Falando em uma cerimônia interna na Rotunda do Capitólio, em Washington DC, Trump não se dirigiu ao Canadá pelo nome, mas se concentrou na fronteira sul com o México, mirando nas ameaças percebidas em torno da imigração ilegal e do crime.

Ao abordar uma série de ordens executivas, Trump confirmou seus planos de estabelecer o “External Revenue Service”, que ele disse que arrecadará tarifas, impostos e receitas de fontes estrangeiras.

“Em vez de taxar nossos cidadãos para enriquecer outros países, vamos tarifar e taxar países estrangeiros para enriquecer nossos cidadãos”, anunciou Trump.

Fazer outras nações pagarem?

Trump reforçou suas afirmações de que fará com que países estrangeiros paguem tarifas pesadas, apesar dos alertas de economistas de que as tarifas levarão a preços mais altos para os americanos.

De acordo com Desenvolvimento de Exportação Canadá, os compradores geralmente são responsáveis pelo pagamento de tarifas e muitos importadores repassam esses custos aos consumidores cobrando preços mais altos.

Wall Street Journal relatou mais cedo na segunda-feira que Trump planejava emitir um amplo memorando para direcionar agências federais a estudar políticas comerciais e avaliar as relações comerciais dos EUA com a China, México e Canadá. Mas a diretriz não chegou a impor novas tarifas no primeiro dia de Trump no cargo.

Leia o texto completo aqui

Biaya Tarif Importação e Protecionismo

A economia global e a economia foram maiores no que se refere a isso, aumentando a popularidade. Em todo o país, a população tem menos dinheiro e não há nada que possa causar danos.

Globalizasi e perdagangan bebas dianggap oleh sebagian pihak sebagai akar dari segala masalah ekonomi yang menimpa para pekerja dan pelaku usaha di berbagai negara. 

Para isso, a economia de negócios deve ter um valor considerável para a proteção necessária, seperti tarif dan juga kuota, com dalih para melindungi kepentingan dalam negeri.

Tidak hanya di Amerika Serikat, Indonésia sendiri juga mengalami gelombang peningkatan skeptisisme hingga penolakan terhadap kebijakan ekonomi terbuka dan perdegangan bebas. 

Dengan mudah kita bisa menemukan berbagai politisi e para pembuat kebijakan yang menolak keras kebijakan tersebut, e mendukung adanya pembatasan perdegangan bebas.

Beberapa waktu lalu misalnya, muncul wacana mengenai kebijakan untuk menerapkan biaya tarif yang tinggi terhadap barang-barang import, khususnya dari China. Não há tarifa, a tarifa é dikenakan cukup tinggi, hingga mencapai 200 persen, para menyikapi banjirnya barang-barang da China di tanah air (cnnindonésia, 07/05/2024).

Barang-barang yang berasal da China tersebut sangat beragam, e kebanyakan merupakan barang-barang konsumsi sehari-hari seperti pakaian dan product-produk tekstil. Não há nada disso, barang-barang yang menjadi bahan industri seperti baja misalnya, juga berpotensi akan terkena biaya tarif sebesar 200 dari pemerintah (cnnindonésia, 5/7/2024).

Wacana mengenai kebijakan tersebut sendiri pada awalnya memang digaungkan pada saat pemerintahan Presidente Joko Widodo, di alguns bulan terakhir pemerintahan Beliau. Pada bulan Oktober lalu, Indonésia melantik presidin baru, yakni Prabowo Subianto. No entanto, há uma explisit dari pemerintahan yang baru para menganulir ou membatalkan kebijakan tersebut.

Selain itu, penting untuk ditat bahwa banyak pejabat tinggi seperti mentori yang sebelumnya menjabat di bawah Presidente Joko Widodo yang sekarang juga kembali menjabat. Oleh karena itu, wacana kebijakan tarif tersebut merupakan hal yang masih memiliki kemungkinan untuk diterapkan.

Adanya wacana mengenai kebijakan penerapan tarif 200% tersebut tentu merupakan hal yang sangat patut untuk kita perhatikan, karena dampaknya akan terasa langsung bagi banyak lapisan masyarakat. Kebijakan ini tidak hanya berdampak kepada jutaan konsumen, tetapi juga ke berbagai pelaku usaha di Indonesia.

Vários tecidos da China têm uma tarifa misalnya, mas não há muitos produtos, há muitos lucros. Semakin meningkatnya harga barang-barang tekstil seperti pakaian yang disebabkan oleh tarif yang tinggi tentu akan semakin menambahkan beban bagi dompet konsumen di Indonesia, karena mereka harus membayar harga jauh lebih tinggi (kompas.com, 4/7/2024).

Não há nada de sisi konsumen, para pelaku usarha yang bergerak di bidang penjualan pakaian misalnya, juga akan mengalami tantangan yang berat. Neste caso, não há nada de pedagang tersebut que mendapatkan marjin keuntungan dari omset yang sangat kecil dari barang yang dijualnya. Pegagang pakaian di pasar Tanah Abang misalnya, yang merupakan salah satu pasar terbesar di Jacarta, mengalami pendapatan yang terus menurun hingga hanya mendapatkan omset sekitar 2-3 juta rupiah per hari (sindonews.com, 13/8/2024).

Dari angka omset tersebut, margem yang didapatkan rata-rata pedagang pakaian di perkirakan sekitar 20-30%, ou sekitar 400-900 ribu per hari (cekbeli.com, 01/08/2025). Adanya biaya tarif yang sangat tinggi tentu akan semakin memperkecil marjin tersebut, e tidak mustahil akan mengancam berbagai pedagang pakaian di Indonesia to gulung tikar.

Wacana mengenai kebijakan para menerapkan tarif yang tinggi ini juga mendapat respon kritik di parlemen dari anggota Dewan Perwakilan Rakyat (DPR). Salah satu anggota komisi 6 DPR misalnya, mengatakan bahwa kebijakan ini tidak menjamin akan menekan jumlah barang importa, e justru akan berpotensi meningkatkan peredaran barang-barang importação ilegal (liputan6.com, 1/7/2024).

Em busca de diplomas, você pode pagar tarifas que não são importantes para importar da China, pois isso representa um risco que não é válido. Lembaga think tank peneliti ekonomi dan politik Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) misalnya, kebijakan ini berpotensi bisa menjadi boomerang bagi perekonomian Indonesia (tempo.co, 1/7/2024).

Indonésia misalnya, merupakan salah satu negara anggota Organização Mundial do Comércio (OMC). Penerapan kebijakan untuk mengenakan tarif yang tinggi tersebut berpotensi akan membuat Indonesia digugat oleh negara-negara anggota WTO lainnya, seperti China, ou pun negara lain yang barang ekspornya ke Indonesia dikenakan tarif yang tinggi oleh pemerintah (tempo.co, 1/7/2024) .

Selain itu, bukan tidak mungkin pula, kebijakan tarif ini akan menimbulkan tindakan tindakan pembalasan dari negara lain seperti China to menerapkan tarif yang tinggi bagi barang-barang dari Indonesia. Com Demikian, hal ini berpotensi akan menimbulkan lanskap perang dagang baru, yang tentunya tidak akan menguntungkan siapa pun, dan justru akan merugikan para konsumen dan juga berbagai pelaku usaha (tempo.co, 1/7/2024).

Hal yang harus menjadi fokus Indonésia harusnya é um bukan membatasi perdagangan e dan menerapkan kebijakan proteksionisme yang ketat, melainkan harus beruapaya untuk memperkuat kualitas dan daya saing industri domestic. Hal ini mencakup berbagai langkah, seperti inovasi, meningkatkan teknologi, dan juga mengembangkan keterampilan.

Sebagai penutup, di era globalisasi e interdependesi ekonomi antar negara yang semakin kuat, tentu Indonesia harus mampu berkcompetisi dengan negara-negara lain to menyediakan product and jasa yang inovatif dna berkualitas. Hal tersebut tentou harus dicapai dengan memperbaiki kualitas manusia agar dapat semakin inovatif dan meningkatkan keterampilan, bukan com menutup dan membatasi perdegangan yang nantinya akan menimbulkan dampak yang contraproduktif.

Publicado originalmente aqui

As tarifas do primeiro dia são ruins para todos — incluindo o presidente Trump

Hoje, no dia da segunda posse do presidente eleito Trump, suas ações propostas para o Dia Um estão começando a tomar forma. Axios relatóriosTrump agora está ponderando tarifas imediatas sobre o Canadá e o México sob o disfarce de uma “emergência económica nacional”. Com o Canadá aumentando seus planos de tarifas retaliatórias para castigar os Estados Unidos "dólar por dólar", as cabeças mais frias no novo governo Trump devem prevalecer se os americanos quiserem ser poupados do golpe em seus orçamentos familiares. 

Trump entende a política prática de ter influência sobre aliados e oponentes, mas corre o risco de perder tudo isso em uma guerra comercial na América do Norte.  

Trump concorreu em 2024 no seu plano para sobrecarregar o Canadá e o México com uma tarifa de 25 por cento como alavanca para obter ajuda em sua agenda de imigração, mas o fato é que os eleitores de Trump serão os que sentirão o impacto direto. As tarifas do primeiro dia tornariam o Super Bowl de fevereiro o mais caro para os consumidores na história recente.  

O aliado de Trump e colega estrela de TV Kevin O'Leary do seriado de sucesso Shark Tank tem circulado no ar, dizendo a Trump ser “hardcore” com tarifas sobre a China. Ele até sugeriu que a China poderia ver “motins nas ruas” se Trump visasse as exportações de consumo da China, o que explica a afluxo maciço de produtos chineses para os EUA em dezembro.  

A América do Norte como bloco comercial é posicionado de forma única para prosperar durante a administração Trump, mas em vez de promover o crescimento e custos mais baixos para os americanos, enquadrar uma guerra comercial destrutiva é tudo o que está sendo discutido. A sofisticada integração da cadeia de suprimentos entre os EUA e o Canadá resultou em preços mais baixos para os consumidores, especialmente quando se trata de automóveis. Em 2022, o Canadá exportou $12,9 bilhões em peças e acessórios para veículos automotores, com $11,4 bilhões fluindo diretamente para os EUA.  

Em Michigan, 13 por cento do produto bruto do estado depende do comércio automotivo canadense. Qual é o sentido de expandir a produção de petróleo dos EUA e reduzir o preço da gasolina na bomba se carros e autopeças vão ficar mais caros em todo o país? Considerando que $132 bilhões em óleo e petróleo flui do Canadá para os EUA todos os anos, é altamente improvável que o governo Trump consiga substituir esse petróleo por produto americano com rapidez suficiente para evitar choques nos postos de gasolina.

Trump e seus parceiros de negociação canadenses não parecem muito comprometidos em reduzir os custos de vida dolorosamente altos que marcaram os anos Biden; em vez disso, eles estão transferindo os custos para novos setores.  

Os canadenses comuns enfrentariam dificuldades significativas devido a uma tarifa de 25% sobre as exportações para os EUA. Mesmo sem os custos quase certos de retaliação, o pão no Canadá poderia escalar de $3,50 a $5,00 por pão. Distribuído pelo setor de alimentos, isso equivale a milhares perdidos anualmente em aumentos de preços. Além dos preços inflacionados, perdas de emprego devido a medidas corporativas de redução de custos pode significar uma catástrofe para o Canadá.  

A mentalidade obstinada de Trump é que este é um problema do Canadá e que pode ser resolvido simplesmente pela submissão às suas exigências, mas é mais provável que os EUA sejam então lançados numa “recessão superficial” antes mesmo de terminar de decorar a Ala Oeste. Como O'Leary alertou sobre a potencial agitação na China, americanos infelizes dissolvem qualquer influência que Trump e os republicanos no Congresso possam ter neste impasse comercial.  

Para termos uma melhor visão das potenciais repercussões, podemos analisar os efeitos da crise de 1930. Lei Tarifária Smoot-Hawley, que impôs tarifas sobre dezenas de milhares de produtos importados em uma tentativa de proteger os fazendeiros e a indústria americana durante a Grande Depressão. resultado foi uma guerra comercial internacional que fez com que o comércio global caísse em 66% e as exportações e importações dos EUA em cerca de dois terços, piorando e prolongando efetivamente a Grande Depressão nos EUA  

Claro, o Canadá respondeu a Smoot-Hawley da mesma forma que Ottawa está planejando agora, provocando sua própria depressão econômica ao norte da fronteira. É o epítome da frase “cortar seu nariz para ofender sua cara”.  

No mínimo, o presidente Trump não deve buscar tarifas precipitadas no primeiro dia após sua posse. O choque do mercado será severo. Na melhor das hipóteses, as negociações comerciais devem prosseguir com cautela e as tarifas devem ser reconhecidas como o imposto sobre os consumidores que a história mostrou que elas são.  

A realidade deve ser nosso guia se a América do Norte vai se recuperar e desbloquear seu potencial econômico nos próximos anos. O Canadá e os EUA podem prosperar, e isso significa que devemos nos unir.  

Publicado originalmente aqui

Role para cima
pt_BRPT

Siga-nos

WASHINGTON

712 H St NE PMB 94982
Washington, DC 20002

BRUXELAS

Rond Point Schuman 6, Box 5 Bruxelas, 1040, Bélgica

LONDRES

Casa Golden Cross, 8 Duncannon Street
Londres, WC2N 4JF, Reino Unido

Kuala Lumpur (Cidade de Kuala Lumpur)

Bloco D, Platinum Sentral, Jalan Stesen Sentral 2, Nível 3 - 5 Kuala Lumpur, 50470, Malásia

OTTAWA

718-170 Laurier Ave W Ottawa, ON K1P 5V5

© COPYRIGHT 2025, CENTRO DE ESCOLHA DO CONSUMIDOR

Também do Consumer Choice Center: ConsumerChamps.EU | FreeTrade4us.org