For over 10 years, I joked that I had a leg on each side of the Canada – U.S. border. I had the privilege of running an international trade association of Canadian and U.S. equipment dealers and we tried our best to serve dealers in both countries as well as we possibly could. I worked out of Kansas City, Mo., but grew up in western Canada; the son of an equipment dealer who was a dual U.S. – Canadian citizen. Like all of my proud and patriotic American friends and colleagues, I was equally proud to be Canadian and always will be. But as much as we Canadians cherish our national identity, it's impossible to ignore that Canada and the United States share more than just a border—we share an integrated equipment market as part of a larger harmonized economy, similar supply chains, and common strategic interests. The geographic reality means the U.S. is not just a neighbor to Canada but a necessary partner, an economic ally intertwined with our prosperity.
President Trump has repeatedly stated that effective Feb. 1, Canada and Mexico will face a 25% tariff on goods unless concrete measures are taken to secure the border. The President has also mused that if Canada doesn’t like it, they can become the 51st state. This sabre rattling has sent the Canadian political and business leaders into crisis mode. Although some steps have been taken by governments to strengthen the Canadian side of the border, and it certainly is in Canada’s best interests to do so, the concern is that it may be not enough. As you can imagine, the issue is dominating the news and coffee row chatter. Making things worse is a leadership void, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has announced he will step down. The Liberal Party is in the process of selecting its new leader, and ultimately the new Prime Minister. The void at the federal level has forced the provincial premiers to step up in a “Team Canada” approach to protect their provincial industries and interests. Although work is being done, there still is no consensus on how to fight back.
Some are suggesting dollar for dollar tariffs as a response. Other are suggesting boycotting U.S. products. I believe both options are wrong.
I believe that the spirit of mutual support runs deep between our two nations. I, like many Canadians, vividly remember September 11, 2001, and the global solidarity that followed. Canada played a critical role, offering refuge to stranded travelers in Gander, Newfoundland, and beyond, where we welcomed and housed thousands of Americans into our communities. Firefighters and waterbombers from Canada are currently helping out in California, and every year in return, U.S.-based firefighters come north to help us out.
The North American Air Defense Command (NORAD) is a combined organization of the U.S. and Canada that provides aerospace warning, air sovereignty and protection for Canada and the continental U.S. No other such joint military protection agreement exists in the world. Partly because of this, Canada relies on the military might of our southern neighbor. We know that if we are attacked from the north or west by the Russians or China (heaven forbid) that the U.S. will be there to support our military. Maybe, we as Canadians take that for granted, so for President Trump to also suggest we meet our NATO spending commitments is not an unreasonable request.
These are just a few examples, but the history of cooperation between our two nations is extensive — whether in security, trade or disaster response, we have stood together.
Yet, no partnership is without friction. Like in Canada, American policies can be unpredictable, and administrations come and go. In the broader context, President Trump is a political parenthesis — an administration with significant but temporary influence. While his tenure will shape U.S. trade policy in ways that affect Canada, it is essential to separate short-term political disruptions from long-term economic realities. Canada’s trade relationship with the U.S. has endured through numerous political cycles, and it will continue to do so beyond any single leader.
For Canada, maintaining strong economic ties with the U.S. is not just beneficial — it’s essential. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, 34 states count Canada as their largest trading partner. The agriculture equipment sector is fully intertwined with Canadian and U.S. manufacturers shipping millions of dollars of product over the border on a daily basis. Legislation impacting the industry also follows a harmonized path. Many state and provincial dealer rights’ laws are similar in nature and scope. And when the California Air Resources Board (CARB) set a standard and pathway towards Tier 4 engines, the Canadian government adopts the regulations and timelines as is. Agri-food exports are also extremely important to Canada. The U.S. market absorbs over half of our agri-food exports, and American food policies, innovations and consumer trends directly impact Canadian producers. Consider this: according to Sid Miller, the 12th Commissioner of the Texas Department of Agriculture, Texas alone has an agricultural sector six times the size of all of Canada’s. When looking at trade from a global perspective, Canada is a significant player, but realism dictates that we acknowledge our position relative to the larger economic forces at play in the U.S.
Dollar for dollar tariffs as a response are akin to taking a sledgehammer to smash a bug on a windshield. Making Canadians consumers pay more for U.S. goods coming into the country should be a non-starter for those Canadians concerned about the rising cost of living and recent spikes in inflation. Affordability measures are all the rage with our governments these days. A policy of adding to the cost of goods, at this point in time, is definitely swimming upstream. And if Trump is truly serious about growing the U.S. economy, he is going to need access to Canadian natural resources like oil, lumber, steel, aluminum and critical minerals to make that happen.
Calls for boycotts against American goods and businesses may be well-intentioned, but they do not change the fundamental structure of our trade dependence. Instead, they serve as a reminder of how interconnected our economies are. If a boycott raises awareness about where our food comes from, strengthens discussions around food sovereignty, or prompts deeper engagement with our supply chains, then there is value in the conversation. However, severing ties with the U.S. is neither feasible nor strategic.
Canada has a strong agricultural sector with world-class standards, but we can still learn from the efficiencies and innovations in American agribusiness. Likewise, Canadian expertise in no-till, sustainability and food safety has valuable insights to offer our American friends. Trade is not a zero-sum game — it is about collaboration, competition and mutual benefit.
So, for those who choose to boycott, or a suggest dollar for dollar tariff response, that is your prerogative. But I believe it is like playing a losing hand. The reality of global trade, especially in agriculture, is that our economies are deeply intertwined, and ensuring that relationship remains functional is in our best interest. The U.S. is not just its government; it is an economic powerhouse with which Canada must continue to engage, pragmatically and strategically.
President Trump is a negotiator. He likes to deal. He likes to win. The onus is on Canada’s leadership to negotiate in that context. Doing so can also bring a win for Canada.
