Trump administration muses about hitting Canada with EU-style tariffs over Carney’s EU pivot - National Post

Prime Minister Mark Carney delivers a speech in the hemicycle of the European Parliament in Strasbourg, eastern France on September 17, 2026. Photo by JEAN-CHRISTOPHE VERHAEGEN /AFP via Getty ImagesArticle contentWASHINGTON, D.C. — Prime Minister Mark Carney has explained his push for a closer relationship with Europe in simple terms.

“Developing an alliance for the future with the European Union … is based on Canada becoming more sovereign,” he said last week at a press conference on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly.

Last week, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen proposed that Canada could become the European Union’s first “associate member,” drawing cheers, some confusion, and jeers from both sides of the Atlantic. U.S. President Donald Trump went further, saying he could see it as a “hostile act” if it were pursued with “bad intention,” and warning he could impose steep tariffs or even curb trade with Europe.

But what about Canada? With trade talks having collapsed in August, leading to more tariffs on both sides, how might Washington respond to Canada’s true north pointing further east — as a legitimate hedge or a challenge to U.S. power?

Get a dash of perspective along with the trending news of the day in a very readable format.

A welcome email is on its way. If you don't see it, please check your junk folder.

The next issue of NP Posted will soon be in your inbox.

We encountered an issue signing you up. Please try again

In a recent interview, Ambassador Pete Hoekstra shared his thoughts, noting that the preliminary trade agreement between the U.S. and Canada can no longer be the starting point for future talks. He said too much had changed in just three and a half weeks, including the EU proposal. Hoekstra offered a possible response that would have significant implications for the Canada-U.S.-Mexico Agreement and U.S.-Canada trade.

“I’ve talked with our trade negotiators, and they said, ‘Well, that may just kind of simplify things, because we have a trade agreement with the EU. We may just slide Canada in under the EU trade agreement. We won’t treat Canada as a country with whom we have a four- or five-thousand-mile border anymore. Canada has made its decision. It is aligning with the EU, so it only makes sense for the U.S. to put Canada under that trade agreement,'” he said.

Washington, in other words, could seek to apply the 15 per cent tariff ceiling imposed on most EU exports. 

Hoekstra’s office declined National Post’s request to comment on the matter.

“Don’t take it seriously,” said Richard Stern, the vice president of the Plymouth Institute for Free Enterprise at Advancing American Freedom, a Washington-based conservative think tank.

“(Hoekstra) is trying to be the pitbull — the voice of people who are trying to stir up trouble, who are trying to separate America and Canada, who are trying to separate America from our closest allies.”

The suggestion that Canada could be folded into a U.S.-EU tariff framework, Stern said, is not a legal path for displacing CUSMA. 

“There’s no real legal theory on that,” he said. 

Alfredo Carrillo Obregon, a trade policy analyst at the Cato Institute, agreed. He said Article 32.10 — CUSMA’s “non-market-country FTA” clause — is the only provision that allows the other two CUSMA parties to terminate the agreement if one member signs a free-trade agreement with a qualifying non-market economy. But he said it would not apply to a Canadian arrangement with the EU.