President Donald Trump on Saturday warned that the United States would impose a 100% tariff on Canadian goods if Ottawa proceeds with a trade deal with China, escalating pressure on one of Washington’s closest trading partners.
The warning marks the latest turn in an increasingly coercive trade strategy that is unsettling long-standing U.S. allies.
In a post on Truth Social on Saturday, Trump said any deal between Canada and China would trigger sweeping retaliation.
Register for Tekedia Mini-MBA edition 19 (Feb 9 – May 2, 2026).
Register for Tekedia AI in Business Masterclass.
Join Tekedia Capital Syndicate and co-invest in great global startups.
Register for Tekedia AI Lab (class begins Jan 24 2026).
“If Canada makes a deal with China, it will immediately be hit with a 100% Tariff against all Canadian goods and products coming into the U.S.A.,” he wrote.
He also accused Beijing of seeking to use Canada as a conduit to evade U.S. trade barriers, adding that Prime Minister Mark Carney would be “sorely mistaken” if he allowed Canada to become what Trump described as a “Drop Off Port” for Chinese exports into the American market.
The threat represents a sharp shift from Trump’s own comments just days earlier. On January 16, he publicly welcomed Carney’s outreach to China, telling reporters at the White House: “That’s what he should be doing. It’s a good thing for him to sign a trade deal. If you can get a deal with China, you should do that.”
The reversal has raised questions in Ottawa and other allied capitals about the consistency and predictability of U.S. trade policy under Trump’s leadership.
The immediate trigger for the dispute was Carney’s announcement earlier this month that Canada and China had reached a preliminary agreement aimed at easing trade barriers. Under the tentative arrangement, Beijing agreed to lower tariffs on selected Canadian agricultural products. At the same time, Ottawa increased import quotas for Chinese electric vehicles, applying a most-favored-nation tariff rate of 6.1%. Canadian officials framed the move as a pragmatic effort to diversify trade ties at a time of heightened global protectionism.
Trump’s response fits a broader pattern that has increasingly put Washington at odds with allies. Since returning to office, he has leaned heavily on tariffs as both an economic and political weapon, arguing that they protect American industry and force trading partners to make concessions. In practice, the approach has often blurred the line between strategic rivals and close partners.
Canada offers a clear example. In August 2025, Trump raised tariffs on Canadian goods to 35%, even as the two countries remained bound by the Canada–U.S.–Mexico Agreement. While most Canadian exports are exempt under CUSMA, key sectors such as steel, copper, and parts of the auto industry have been caught in the crossfire. For Canada, the measures have revived memories of earlier tariff battles during Trump’s first term, when steel and aluminum duties strained diplomatic ties and triggered retaliatory measures.
Similar tensions have surfaced with other U.S. allies. European governments have repeatedly voiced unease over Washington’s readiness to impose tariffs tied to national security or industrial policy goals, while Asian partners have grown wary of being forced to choose between access to the U.S. market and economic engagement with China. The result has been a gradual push among middle powers to hedge their bets by broadening trade relationships and strengthening regional blocs.
Carney’s recent remarks at the World Economic Forum in Davos captured that mood. Speaking to a global audience, he warned against economic coercion by the world’s largest powers and argued that middle powers must band together to defend their interests. A day later, Trump withdrew Canada’s invitation to join his proposed “Board of Peace,” an initiative he has pitched as a forum for global stability but which requires a $1 billion fee for countries seeking a permanent seat.
The episode has reinforced perceptions that access to U.S. political and economic initiatives is increasingly transactional. Carney had said last week that Canada intended to join the board, though details were still under discussion. Trump’s abrupt reversal underscored how quickly diplomatic goodwill can evaporate when trade disagreements enter the picture.
The broader concern is strategic for Washington’s allies as tariffs aimed at China are widely understood as part of a larger effort to curb Beijing’s economic influence. Yet when those same tools are wielded against partners like Canada, they risk weakening the alliances that have traditionally underpinned U.S. global influence. Trade officials in several capitals now see diversification not as a choice, but as a necessity.
Neither the White House nor the Canadian prime minister’s office immediately responded to requests for comment on Trump’s latest remarks. However, it is clear that the threat of a 100% tariff has moved the dispute beyond routine trade friction. It has become a test case for how far the United States is willing to go in pressuring allies — and how prepared those allies are to look elsewhere when the cost of alignment keeps rising.